The Risks of a Long War?

I got another comment asking questions. I have broken up the comment into parts and responded to each. Each question or issue is in a block quote.

Can you also talk about the risk of a long war? I feel like Russia would finish this quickly if they could but they can’t.

I am sure that most Russians would like the war over fast. But the current approach :

a.) reduces economic hardships

b.) keeps Russian casualties at a minimum

c.) represents the “war” as a conflict between fraternal peoples, since most Ukrainians speak Russian and because of historic ties.

d.) reduces the chance of massive Ukrainian civilian casualties and the destruction of civil society deaths . Already, Ukrainian casualties are as high as 1.4 million.

e.) the real “war” is seen now as with the US and NATO and resurgent Nazism.

Negative aspects: Russia's economy, yes they survived sanctions but 20% interest rate? is that sustainable?

The economy has not only “survived” sanctions – it has benefited from them, and the stimulus they offer to domestic production and business. One cannot argue with a 4% growth rate and and over 7% growth if we set aside revenues from energy exports.

The interest rate is high, which would be a huge problem in a Western “market economy because of:

Reduced borrowing and spending: Higher interest rates make it more expensive for individuals and businesses to borrow money, leading to decreased spending and investment.

Slower economic growth: Reduced spending can lead to slower economic growth.

Increased borrowing costs: Loan payments, mortgages, and credit card interest rates all increase with higher interest rates

Potential impact on stock prices: Higher borrowing costs for companies can negatively affect stock prices.

Potential impact on housing market: Higher mortgage rates can reduce demand for homes and potentially lower prices.

But the Russian economy is not a de-industrializing, financialized market economy run by a few billionaire like in the US; it is a managed, industrial growth economy, in which many companies, if not owned by the country, are regulated. The first thing Putin did he took office as to reverse privatization.

The Russian government offsets the effects of the Central Bank bank with a huge range of subsidies for every sector of the economy, public and private, including mortgages and rents. There are a lot of people with new houses, the high central bank rate notwithstanding.

House in Moscow

Keep in mind that Russia has extraordinarily low levels of debt, a key as Michael Hudson says to economic resilience and sustainability.

China is also a managed public / private neo-capitalist economy and has the same advantages, which is why it could manage its housing “crisis” so well, debt problems and leverage American sanctions to build self-sufficiency into all sectors of the economy.

As a result, both Russia and China have stellar growth rates, reducing poverty on the one hand, with a progressively improving standard of living at all levels.

Using Western standards to judge either Russia or China is like comparing apples and oranges. They are not the same. It is G7 economies that are not sustainable.

Long war brings surprises or black swan event, example Operation Spider Web?

This operation had been planned for a long time—and was hardly a black swan. “If it quacks like a duck…”. It was largely unsuccessful and did not affect Russia in any significant way – except to give it an excuse to set up a buffer zone east of the Dniepr and to expand military strikes in Western Ukraine.

I’m pretty sure the west has a lot more plans in the works.

Doubtless. I am sure the West has plans. But its plans rarely work out.

To date, all those plots and schemes have had little effect in the long term.

Even Western “success” in Syria is a hardly a “victory”. Syria is now a mess and an embarrassment for Turkey, the West, and Israel. Russia and Iran are lucky to be out of the place.

Also one other important thing is, Putin is not really young, he is in his 70s, so what kind of long war is this?

People age differently. One of my areas of study is longevity and aging and I have read hundreds of medical articles on this subject.

Putin is now just 72, younger than Trump. He is very careful about his health and weight, both physically and mentally active and eats a very healthy diet.

His biological age is clearly much younger than 72, no more than 60, whereas Biden and Trumps’ biological ages are much higher than their chronological ages.

Putin’s term of office will expire when he is 77 or 78. He could conceivably run again, retiring in 2036. . But he will be looking for a successor. To be sure, a worthy successor!

Let us keep in mind that Mohamad Mathadir, Malaysia’s most successful prime minister, left office in 2020. He has just recently celebrated his 100^th birthday.

Of course, the West has celebrated Putin’s impending death for years, predicting his imminent demise from almost every disease.

Are they going to have Post-Putin problem?

“Post Putin”? Will the “West” still exist as it does today. By 2030 it will have declined to a point where it may not matter than much. Is Putin gong to have a Post-USA problem, after the US breaks up into statelets.

I think because of Putin, the west failed to isolate Russia, many in Africa and gulf countries respect or admire Putin.

The next Russian leader, presumably, a hard liner would not be appealing to the international community.

I believe the west knows this and that is why they really want to bring down Putin.

There are few “hardliners” in Russia in positions of power in Russia – but many pragmatists, just as is the case in China. American culture is ideological, which inevitably leads to hardline positions. Russia and China are pragmatic. The American government is dominated by lawyers and MBAs—Russia and China by engineers, including Putin and Xi. They engineer solutions; they don’t force them.

The West assumes successors to both Putin and Xi will be “hardliners” because that is part of their narrative –the fake history that they have invented for themselves — that Russia is bent on conquest —a 21st Century Golden Horde–which, of course, justifies the Western preoccupation with destroying Russia.It is also a projection of American culture.

I hope these explanations help.

Looking forward to your analysis on this. I will buy a coffee if you could perhaps write an article about this topic.

I thank you for these questions, which allow me to state opinions in a different context.

Chappy does zen….

Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmm……Coffffffeeeeeeeeeeeeeee……

Click here to buy Chappy and Ichi coffee which they will share with me if I am good.