Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Speculation: How Putin Achieved the End of Russia
I think we are about (in the months or years to come) to witness something truly amazing: the end of Russia.
Here is how I see it playing out: Poland and Czechia and many other nations are coming to realize that bleeding Russia out in Ukraine using Ukrainian or other volunteers is far preferable to a future war on their own turf. So they keep pouring personnel and weaponry into Ukraine. Since their economies far exceed Russia (even before sanctions), their ability to keep re-arming the battlefield greatly exceed Russia’s.
Russia bleeds its army, both in terms of armaments and personnel, in Eastern Ukraine; it might take a month or two years, but as long as they keep prosecuting this war, the Russians bleed out. The Ukrainians, backed by the enormous amounts of material and war toys from the US and the rest of Europe, end up pulverizing the Russians — and this time they might even recapture Crimea from an entirely demoralized, depressed, and deflated Russian army. The anti-ship missiles coming into Ukraine ensure the Russian fleet in the Black Sea becomes hunted and on the run. The Russian populace wants nothing to do with going into battle (those who have not already fled to Turkey or Armenia to avoid being conscripted). While Ukraine’s soldiers are motivated and energized, fighting for their homeland and national pride.
Russia ends up without an effective military. Which makes it ripe for secessionist movements across the land, as well as invaders across borders (like Japan retaking the Kuril Islands), because there is no effective force to prevent these internal and external forces from breaking Russia into smaller and smaller pieces. China may even invade to secure much-needed oil and gas resources.
So the irony in this situation would be that Putin will have achieved precisely the opposite of his goal. Instead of presiding over the expansion of Russia, he is the last dictator of Russia as we know it today.
Published in General
I certainly hope you are right in your projection.
Gee, I hope everything works out for the poor Ukrainians while all this is going on, and we don’t have an expanded war, and no nukes or chemical, biological weapons used, or we don’t suffer food and fuel shortages, and have for example Egypt become an Islamic State when the people revolt because there’s no food. That would make things very, very bad for Isreal.
But it seems you’ll be happy as long as Russia shrinks and Putin loses (too) .
I’m for a diplomatic solution, but it seems our idiotic warmongering regime think they can achieve something like your grand speculations. I am not so optimistic.
By the way, something not working out as intended is not irony.
Or, Russia will find powerful allies.
We’ll see what happens. It wouldn’t be the first time one man has managed to destroy the political unit over which he presided. (See Kilpatrick, Kwame.)
Sadly, how this goes depends a lot on the mental state of one man, Putin.
If things do start to go badly for Russia, and he senses defeat is a real possibility, what does he do? Eat a bullet, like Hitler? Or send nukes?
If he does the former you might be right. But I shudder to think about Putin cornered and getting more desperate.
There are lots of bad outcomes that are already happening. But I am an optimistic fellow, and if this war destroys Russia as a potential threat to its neighbors… then that would be a silver – and maybe even gold – lining.
Our job is to combat evil. Putin’s regime is evil.
That’s not the ironic part. It’s not just Putin’s attempt “not working out as intended.” It’s that he started it to glorify and expand Russia, but he actually destroys it. How would you describe that, if not ironic?
Depends on what comes after Putin.
Maybe. But if Russia is sufficiently chastized, bankrupted, etc, it might not matter a whole lot.
Another human in charge, dagnabit!
Which one what are they like is my point. How do they deal with Russia’s permanent interests? Does Russia itself fracture, which would cause no end of turmoil? Who gets the nukes?
Which is what people thought about the Soviet collapse. But hey, if it doesn’t work out the way we planned the first time let’s do the same thing again and see if turns out differently this time. Because why not?
I do.
I don’t know what ending Russia would look like exactly—they would still have nukes, for one thing—but I fear that a severely weakened Russia would play into China’s hands. A Russia that does not threaten the West and is also not dependent on China, would be a good thing, though very difficult to achieve.
If you know of a diplomatic means by which Russia can be driven out of Ukraine, you should share that information with Ukraine and the rest of Europe. It could save a lot of lives.
Or by “diplomatic,” maybe you referring to the ends rather than the means?
In the meantime, Putin has put the Butcher of Syria in charge of all the fighting in Ukraine. The appropriately named Dvornikov has already shown how he does his work, though it will probably take him a little time to really take charge of everything.
Someone needs to find out where he is, and take him out.
If he gets everything organized, it’s not likely to be so easy like it was with those other generals. (Not that it was exactly easy in those cases.)
I dunno, can’t one of those anti-tank or anti-ship missiles get him from at least a couple miles out?
I think Russia has said they’ll withdraw if Ukraine commits to Finnlandisation.
That’s a starting point.
What difference has killing one head of Hamas after the other made? It doesn’t address their basic issue, and neither will killing various Russian generals address Russia’s. I’m not even convinced that offing Putin would make it all go away.
Maybe, but it’s not likely to make things worse. And killing Soleimani seemed to have a quieting effect on Iran.
That would be a horrible place to start. The starting point for negotiations should be the Russians all go home and pay reparations for the damage done. It might have to be the ending point, though, if Ukraine is defeated. The Ukrainian people don’t seem to think such an endpoint is preferable to continuing to defend their country, and we should support them so long as they continue to be willing.
@iwe I’m not sure that we will ever see the “end” of Russia. Agreeing with your analysis, but perhaps with a slightly different conclusion, we might be on the verge of another “transformation” of Russia, something we have seen at points during many centuries. It’s never been a good thing, by the way.
Their basic issue is: Biden and the US are weak, so now is a good time to grab some.
As to offing Putin, it might depend on who does the offing. If the U.S. were to do it, it would probably not have a good result. If Putin’s oligarchs were to do it, that would probably be the end of the war.
Except if the oligarchs are only oligarchs because of Putin, maybe they wouldn’t.
Darn it, Arahant, do you have to keep giving away hints to Ricochet Silent Radio plotlines? Now the surprise element is gone. I’ll just have to give the nuclear weapons to the Balzers.
But don’t feel bad. You’re more than capable of hatching a history-changing plot to get them back.
Those are about the only oligarchs who are left in Russia.
If only we could select our opponents’ negotiating starting point.
Edited to add: in fact let’s just skip the negotiating and select an outcome. Is this a good time to mention that I would like a pony?
That’s what nukes are for!
You must have a really big backyard. I also fear one of your cats accidently stepping on the launch button.