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.
If Ukraine Wins, Who Loses?
There’s the obvious answers – Putin, the image of Russian might, the Duginist dream of solidifying Russian control over its insolent children.
Who else? The Russian Orthodox Church, for declaring this a holy war? Xi, for his association with a loser whose actions renewed Taiwanese determination to stave off an invasion? The countries that have been buying Russian military gear and now have a rep, however justified, for buying junk? US pundits who backed Russia’s invasion? Renewable energy advocates, suddenly on the back foot because nuclear is a better option than Russian gas? US intelligence agencies that failed to figure out how the Russian forces are ancient and hollowed out by corruption?
You could also note who else wins: the West, for one. Superior armaments and tech, better logistics, the products of a more energetic and innovative culture. I suspect there’s a non-insubstantial intersection between those who are comfy with Russian control of Ukraine and those who would be irritated by a Western win, because the West is decadent and subject to rule from our Davos overlords, and ought not to prevail until it is overhauled and remade.
This is not a thread about whether Ukraine will win, or what victory looks like. Just a question about what shakes out when it is apparent to all that Russia could not prevail.
Published in General
4 Ukrainian Economists write an open letter to Noam Chomsky in response to Chomsky’s commentaries on the Russian war on Ukraine.
Open Letter to Noam Chomsky (and other like-minded intellectuals) on the Russia-Ukraine war
Link to the entire article here.
True but in the cold war era there was a lot more logic for NATO as a balance to the Warsaw Pact. Most of the successful Turkish coups were before that ended. The last coup I recall in Turkey was to oust Erdogan and it failed. There could be some argument that had that happened it would have moved Turkey back towards democratic norms. My argument is that if Turkey continues on its current trajectory It is going to find that NATO chaffs too much and may look elsewhere for its security guarantees.
Not exactly sure that Israel is really dependent on the US. Any more than any other allied country. There is certainly trade between the US and Israel and Israel is a major purchaser of US defense products; however, the US also purchases technology from the Israeli defense industry as well. I guess you could say the US tends to keep the UN from condemning Israel ever 2 1/2 seconds with its security council veto. Israel is certainly in the US’es orbit, but so is Germany, UK, Australia, and dozens of other countries.
Okay I’ll grant you that one. Although it is always easier in a coup if you don’t have the “government in exile” problem, so it was certainly convenient either way.
It was a necessary condition whether or not it was sufficient could be argued. Much like the first cause and effect are hard to know. without a deeper understanding of the politics of the country in question or the time.
I think the peace process in the Middle East has long history of being setback. I also suspect that if Israel ceased to exist tomorrow there would still not be peace in the Middle East. In a certain sense the problem for the Palestinians is that the central contest in the Middle East currently isn’t about the Israeli/ Palestinian problem anymore. It is actually about the Iranians and Sunnis Arab states. In that conflict Israel is an ally to the Sunnis, so the Palestinian problem is a unwelcome annoyance. Especially since the Palestinians are quasi on the other side of that divide. They probably should have agreed to a two state solution in the first decade of the 21st century. I don’t think their bargaining position is improving.
In modern times there is a thought that Democracies don’t go to war against each other, which I guess is fair enough if you narrow the scope of history to be the latter half of the twentieth and the first couple of decades of the twenty-first century. I personally think that is ahistoric. Two democracies could easily find themselves with opposite national interests that could lead them into a war. The fact it hasn’t happened yet may be more of an accident than a feature. It may make sense though given this is the conventional wisdom that democracies should be allied with other democracies.
I don’t think it is impossible that two democratic nations could go to war against each, just less likely, for reasons that we could discuss in more detail.
It isn’t shocking that just about every conflict the United States has been involved in has been with non-democratic nations: The Taliban in Afghanistan, Saddam Hussain’s Iraq, Communist North Vietnam, Communist South Korea.
Even during the “Cold War,” nearly all of the military planning was done to counter non-democratic nations such as Cuba, Nicaragua, Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact nations under communist dictatorship.
America fought Japan in world war 2 when Japan was non-democratic but in modern times Japan is democratic and a close ally of the United States.
So, I don’t think this general idea, that democracies are less likely to go to war with each other than non-democratic nations with other non-democratic nations or a democratic nation with a non-democratic nation, is ahistorical.
That sounds like an interesting discussion. In part I guess NATO has been a large part of that legacy, since a large number of democracies have been in the same alliance, or web of alliances
It is ahistoric in the sense that it is a modern phenomenon. Certainly ancient democracies and republics went to war all the time. Given a relatively liberal definition of democracy 1812 was a war between a democracy and a constitutional monarchy. World war 1 is a little trickier because it kind of depends how you classify Germany in that war. Realistically what we are talking about is a phenomenon that has occurred only Post World War 1. I mean you could I suppose craft a definition of “Democracies” and “War” that generally excluded every circumstance where it has happened.
The main reason it hasn’t happened more often may be that there haven’t been a large number of democracies before. Also during and post cold war many democracies had military alliances with each other or were part of a large complex web where if they didn’t have direct alliances with each other they at alliance partners in common with each other.
I understand what you are arguing now. I agree that this “democracies rarely wage war against each other” probably only holds to 1945 to the present and much of this does depend on how one defines democracy.
Another (unrelated) topic:
Erdogan’s Turkey is seen as authoritarian. But it seems possible that Erdogan will lose re-election next year.
I have an uncle who came to the US from Turkey during college. He is a lapsed Muslim, basically an atheist or agnostic who prefers the “old Turkey” where religious belief was considered a private matter. He dislikes Erdogan with a passion. If Erdogan loses next year, my uncle will be celebrating and so will many of his family members that still live in Istanbul.
There was a movie made many years ago, starring John Candy and Alan Alda, titled “Canadian Bacon,” in which the United States decides to invade Canada. I don’t remember much about the movie.
But it does make one wonder under what circumstances that, say, the United Kingdom would wage war against the United States in the 21st century or under what circumstances would France wage war against Spain.
It’s hard to imagine. People of democratic countries generally want their government to spend money on them, not on weapons and conquests.
I read that letter. Normally I don’t pay much attention to the rantings of pundits like Chomsky, a doddering old fool, but the Ukrainian writer summed things up extremely clearly. It is like a blueprint on how to refute the absurd allegations coming from the left. He also confirmed something I was highly suspicious of – the referendum in the Crimea on whether to remain in Ukraine was done at the point of a gun.
It’s about time for Chomsky to move away form this dreadful country the United States and take up residence in his beloved country, Russia. His life could be so much ore enhanced there, and ours, too!
The Israeli-Arab wars and conflicts pale in comparison to the Arabs and Muslims fighting each other. I once added up the death toll just from 20th Century Arab conflicts and it was several million people. As we speak right now, the Yemeni Civil War has killed a quarter of a million people and the Syrian Civil War has killed over half-a-million people. By comparison the total death count in all Israeli-Arab wars combined has been around 70-80,000 people. There was a Wikipedia page that outlined the numerous wars and rebellions in the Middle-East in the 20th Century. but I can’t find it right now.
In lieu of that I’ll show somebody’s astounding list listing of all Muslim wars since the beginning of Islam. It is mind-boggling.
http://wikibin.org/articles/list-of-wars-in-the-muslim-world.html
How can you find that to be ahistoric when you say it hasn’t happened yet? (democracies declaring war on each other)
[Edit] Sorry, I didn’t see your answer in a later comment.
I hope that happens. I don’t think Erdogan has been especially good for Turkey. Also I think a post Erdogan Turkey is a less problematic NATO partner. That might address some of the tensions that exist between Turkey and the rest of NATO. Plus I wouldn’t mind visiting Istanbul some day but would prefer not to go to someplace that is becoming more Authoritarian and more Islamist.
As for the modern period of Democracies not going to war with one another I can see a world where could change. Especially with the US in decline and China in Ascendancy. Fortunately Ukraine has simultaneously exposed the rot in the Russian military and galvanized NATO. I have two takeaways from this. First the rot may not be as deep in the West as I fear. Second I wonder what kind of shape China’s military is in. It is assumed it would be capable and formidable; however, a similar assessment was made about Russia prior to the invasion of Ukraine. China has some of the same pathologies that exist in Russia. Also Russia has conducted successful overseas operations before. As Far as I know China hasn’t been involved in any. Taking Taiwan is a major undertaking that will require probably a coordinated amphibious landing and airborne operations. I am not sure that China has those capabilities. I hope that seeing the Russians actions in Ukraine gives China pause.
Right now I tend to agree it is difficult to see how in the current world with the current alignment democracies come to blows. In a post US world order I think things could get more dicey. I could see a Middle East democracy getting into a war with Israel fairly easily. I could even see that being popular. I could also see a post US world where India could be involved in war with a democracy as it tries to carve out a sphere of influence. I could also envision a world where India is in China’s sphere of influence and gets into a war with a Western democracy. These are less likely at the moment, but I can envision them happening.
Which Middle East democracy are you talking about? I think there are only two. Israel and Iraq.
Turkey is still nominally a democracy as is Egypt. I agree both are trending towards authoritarianism, but that is where it gets complicated. I mean not to put too fine a point on it so are Canada and the US. I was in general looking a bit into the future. I don’t think right now it is likely to happen, but I could see it happening.
Also how do you score Lebanon? Gaza? or the PA?
The only thing I remember about that movie is that it opens with an announcement that due to the poor economy there has been an increase in suicide attempts at Niagara Falls, and so therefore the police are going to be paid a bonus of ($100?) for every person they talk out of committing suicide, and ($400?) for every body they fish out of the water at the base of the falls.
Cut to a scene of two cops [John Candy and Rhea Perlman IIRC] standing at the bottom of the falls holding fishing nets and screaming “JUMP!” at somebody standing at the edge up top.
My aunt who married a Turkish immigrant to the United States (they met when she was in law school and he was studying civil engineering) told me that her favorite place to take a vacation is Turkey. (This was many years ago, perhaps things have changed enough to where she no longer holds this opinion.)
She told me that Turkey is a place where you can see one woman lying on a beach in a skimpy bikini and a few moments later you see a woman wearing very conservative Islamic dress, covering most of her body.
My aunt told me that everyone in her husband’s family would describe themselves as Muslim, but they never read the Quran, never pray, never fast and never attend a Mosque. It seems like there is a tension between those, like Erdogan, who want Islam to be a bigger public presence in Turkish society and those who prefer Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s ideas in support of secularization and westernization of Turkey.
My uncle told me years ago when I first met him (back in the early 1980s) that all of the Universities in Turkey are English only. That is how strict the Turkish elites believed in “westernization.”
Unlikely.
What I don’t understand is – Israeli public opinion was deeply divided about Oslo (?) and the agreements were deeply unpopular with Palestinians – so why did they all sign and proceed?
But the outcome was a clearly established line regarding what could be compromised and what couldn’t, right? I doubt many on the Right were glad about the assassination or approved of it, but the long term outcome was in their favour.
It’s never been.
No, it’s between the people and their unelected rulers (and the bargains those rulers make to stay in power).
These tensions, which led to the Arab Spring (and then the Arab Winter), had nothing to do with Israel and the Palestinians.
And that, imnsho, is why the Arab States’ Governments see Iran as such a threat but the Arab people do not.
For those unelected rulers? Absolutely. For the people? I am not so sure.
It hurts me to say this, but I think Erdogan has been a mixed bag for Turkey. Personally I am a lot more sympatico with Kemalists, but honesty compels me to admit that they failed Turkey in some important ways – economic, political, social – and hence Erdogan (and the string of vaguely Islamist predecessors that the army kept deposing). You cannot force people to be genuinely secular, you can only force external compliance which undermines – by its nature – secularism.
(It’s the same basic pattern that is unfolding now in India. At independence a secular elite made rules for a partly imaginary country and people – of course that didn’t work.)
I am hopeful of this Imamoglu guy who won (twice) the Istanbul municipal elections.
I was in Istanbul about ten years ago and it was a lot like that in terms of personal diversity.
I think it’s unfair to put Turkey in with Egypt (which is a democracy in name only).
Turkey is under strain – but Imamoglu did (eventually) win Istanbul, despite Government interference. And with a bigger majority the second time than the first time. That tells you what the voters in Turkey think about interfering with their democracy – as did their response to the attempted coup against Erdogan.
I have read a few books about Erdogan and modern Turkey written by Soner Cagaptay.
Here is an overview of Cagaptay’s most recent book, which I have not gotten around to reading yet.
And this is more from Cagaptay, writing about Erdogan:
Here is a link to Cagaptay’s most recent book on Amazon.
A Sultan in Autumn: Erdogan Faces Turkey’s Uncontainable Forces
Australia has an election Saturday, which is today (in Australia). The right of center government might be deposed.
That would seem to mean “Well, so much for Australia!”
Some polling on Erdogan against various possible opponents:
Mansur Yavas, mayor of Ankara: 54 pct to Erdogan 37 pct
Ekrem Imamoglu, mayor of Istanbul: 50 pct to Erdogan 41 pct
Meral Aksener, former deputy Speaker Grand National Assembly of Turkey: 44 pct to Erdogan 42 pct
Voted out. A bit different.