Tweet
The shit-storm in Ukraine at the tactical level continues. It is a constant exchange of territory in the range of 1-2 square kms. None of the advances or retreats can be confirmed. Analysts suggest there are three Ukrainian attack axis - along the Kreminia line, around Bakhmut and in the southern region from Zaphorizia towards Crimea, the later being the axis having the most success. Reportedly, Ukrainian reserves have not yet been committed to any of the three axis suggesting that the southern axis towards Crimea could be the most likely primary attack axis. The Russians are being credited with (1) learning from past mistakes and (2) Defending in doctrinally sound ways. Casualties on both sides are reportedly high. Outcomes are unknown - other than analysts predict a continuation of the shit-storm at the tactical level for months if not years.
On a strategic level, I've framed the Ukrainian conflict as a battle to replace the current world order and domination of that order by western democracies with the major axis nations governed by autocrats and dictators seeking to replace it and diminish the dominating western influence. After WWII there were three economic institutions established: The UN, the IMF and the WTO. Of the 3, the IMF has enormous powers to influence global economic development and trade outcomes with the WTO not far behind the IMF in influencing global economic outcomes.
Recently Antonio Guterres, Secretary General of the UN, called for more - I'll call it equity - balance of power within the organs of the UN, in particular the security council. He alleges that the post WWII centers of power, mainly the wealthy democratic nations of the west, should give way to "developing nations" - in actuality, the fucked up and mostly corrupt governments that have ruined the economies of their countries and sought bailouts by the IMF - Argentina and South Africa are perfect examples. The axis powers of China, Russia, Iran and NK, also have aligned national objectives of replacing the current world order as it is defined above with a multipolar one that diminishes the impact of western social liberalism on governance and economic outcomes. Putin's wooing of the governments of African nations is a diplomatic move to align Russia with global trends to give these fucked up nations "equitable access" to the levers of power. Screw that idea. Make no mistake. Russia and China aren't interested at all in advancing the interests of African and to a lesser extent Asian countries. Their interests lie solely in advancing their economic and military power and diminishing that of the US and the EU. Both are just riding the available horse and the UN is stupidly facilitating it - shocking, I know.
The right horse to ride on if one has any interest in furthering American (and EU) military, economic and political interests is the one that conclusively demonstrates that conduct demonstrated by Russia and Putin in Ukraine will carry costs so high as to be too risky. China is watching.
On a strategic level, I've framed the Ukrainian conflict as a battle to replace the current world order and domination of that order by western democracies with the major axis nations governed by autocrats and dictators seeking to replace it and diminish the dominating western influence. After WWII there were three economic institutions established: The UN, the IMF and the WTO. Of the 3, the IMF has enormous powers to influence global economic development and trade outcomes with the WTO not far behind the IMF in influencing global economic outcomes.
Recently Antonio Guterres, Secretary General of the UN, called for more - I'll call it equity - balance of power within the organs of the UN, in particular the security council. He alleges that the post WWII centers of power, mainly the wealthy democratic nations of the west, should give way to "developing nations" - in actuality, the fucked up and mostly corrupt governments that have ruined the economies of their countries and sought bailouts by the IMF - Argentina and South Africa are perfect examples. The axis powers of China, Russia, Iran and NK, also have aligned national objectives of replacing the current world order as it is defined above with a multipolar one that diminishes the impact of western social liberalism on governance and economic outcomes. Putin's wooing of the governments of African nations is a diplomatic move to align Russia with global trends to give these fucked up nations "equitable access" to the levers of power. Screw that idea. Make no mistake. Russia and China aren't interested at all in advancing the interests of African and to a lesser extent Asian countries. Their interests lie solely in advancing their economic and military power and diminishing that of the US and the EU. Both are just riding the available horse and the UN is stupidly facilitating it - shocking, I know.
The right horse to ride on if one has any interest in furthering American (and EU) military, economic and political interests is the one that conclusively demonstrates that conduct demonstrated by Russia and Putin in Ukraine will carry costs so high as to be too risky. China is watching.
Comment