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 40 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Resolution to the Ukraine Problem
Have you ever seen a freight train fly? That is the image that keeps coming into my head when I consider the situation Russia is in. Russia is weighed down by alcoholism, a lack of development, out-of-date infrastructure, an economy on the brink and a rapidly aging population. That was before the war. Today, with the exodus of the young professionals who had the sense to escape early on and the deaths of so many who did not, everything is worse. In exchange for a slice of Ukrainian territory, they have sacrificed even more of their future.
As a sort of twisted insight into this reality, a recent Wall Street Journal article highlighted the economic benefits poor regions have seen — due to cash payments for those who have been killed in battle. A 35-year-old man can be expected to earn more for his family, dead on the battlefield, than he would have over 25 years of working, assuming he had a full-time job. In reading the article, I detected a tone of near-celebration among the women left behind. They are buying apartments and cars — and commemorative plaques to the men who paid for it all with their lives. There’s a problem with this zoomed-in economic perspective. On the battlefield that 35-year-old man added nothing to the Russian economy. Because of those losses, the net present value of the Russian state is plummeting.
They are like a train rushing along a track that heads straight into a mountain. They are getting heavier and heavier as they go. And they are hoping, somehow, to gain enough speed to take off.
It isn’t going to happen.
None of this means Russia can’t “win the war.” Ukraine is also suffering. Ukraine has nowhere near the manpower and the Ukrainians, after the history of the early 1990s promises, can’t trust any security guarantee offered by the United States or Europe. Of course, given the track record of Russia in Moldova, Georgia, Chechnya and elsewhere, the Ukrainians also have zero trust in any agreements signed by the Russian State. As Darth Putin puts it so succinctly: the Warsaw Pact is “the only modern mutual defense alliance in history to repeatedly attack itself.”
Given all the above, what kind of off-ramp can there possibly be? Do these states keep throwing lives at each other until their respective trains crash headlong into the mountain? Does Russia expand its campaign of sabotage against the West, hoping to draw NATO troops in so they have the honor of at least losing to what they consider a peer? Do they start a nuclear conflict, unwilling to face the prospect that everything has truly and irredeemably gone sideways? Do they invite the Chinese into their war, capturing Ukraine but surrendering their own independence in the process?
None of these possibilities seem the least bit hopeful. As much as Trump has talked about phone calls bringing an end to the war, it seems tremendously unlikely. Russia won’t surrender what they’ve captured, Ukraine won’t trust Russia, and NATO soldiers won’t stand at the front. What hope can there possibly be for a ceasefire, much less a lasting peace?
In reality, hope abounds so long as you know where to look for it.
Ukraine won’t agree to a ceasefire because they can’t trust Russia. But what if they don’t need to trust Russia? What if a ceasefire, even one that leaves Russian soldiers on Ukrainian territory and cedes conquered territory in Kursk, is actually a path to Ukrainian security and long-term independence?
It is critical to remember that a ceasefire is not a ceasewar. A ceasefire is simply an opportunity for both sides in a conflict to regroup and redouble their capacity to fight the next round of war. Israel and Hezbollah had a ceasefire in 2006. Until recently, it looked as if Hezbollah ‘won the ceasefire’ by building up what seemed to be an overwhelming rocket capacity in the south of Lebanon. In fact, much more quietly, Israel was the winner of that round of non-fighting. In the context of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, if there is a ceasefire and Russia rebuilds its capacity faster than Ukraine does, then there will be another round of warfare within a year or two. Putin’s legitimacy rests on it. The ceasefire will have served Russian purposes and extended their warfighting capacity. On the other hand, if there is a ceasefire and Ukraine outgrows and outbuilds Russia then the ceasefire will be continually extended until the present Russian government and foreign policies are abandoned.
It is this concept that serves as the key to enabling Ukrainian security under the Trump administration and beyond.
NATO countries, given rising global threats, need to raise their defense expenditures, possibly by as much as 1% of GDP. Due to their provision to Ukraine, NATO members have severe shortages of critical armaments. Among the items they do have, many are outdated in the context of 21st-century warfare (the best in European and American equipment barely made a dent in the great offensive of the summer of 2023). Some of the needed defense spending will go to top-line weapons systems like fighter jets and ships. However, significant spending is needed in more mundane areas: ballistic missiles, artillery shells, mortars, drones, body armor, armored vehicles, howitzers, etc…
For its part, Ukraine has historically been a major manufacturer of weapons. Since the 2022 re-invasion, they have re-upped their capacity and are continuing to expand it. They are, in some areas, producing among the most advanced and battle-tested war-fighting technology in the world.
The result is a match made on Earth.
In order to help address NATO’s own issues, NATO members could commit to spending 0.1% of their GDP on purchasing Ukrainian arms. The combined GDP of NATO is 46 trillion dollars, so this is 46 billion dollars — or almost exactly 1/4 of the Ukrainian GDP. Just as the rest of the world can buy Ukrainian grain, vodka and software services, the Western world would be encouraged to buy Ukrainian arms.
NATO members could purchase whatever they want from whichever Ukrainian manufacturers they want, including low-cost drones, discount howitzers… Due to Western regulations, Western quality and purchasing requirements would apply, raising the quality of the Ukrainian industry as a whole. If Ukrainian companies are successful in the competition for these arms dollars, they could expect to sell ever more into NATO stockpiles.
The result would be a rearming of NATO, massive growth in the Ukrainian arms industry, a strengthened bulwark against Russian aggression and the underwriting of the rebirth of the Ukrainian economy — all without the corrupting influence of aid dollars or the need to trust security guarantees that never stand up in the face of Realpolitik.
Ukraine is often referred to as Europe’s breadbasket. Perhaps it would benefit everybody (except Vladimir Putin himself) if Ukraine became the armory as well.
Published in Foreign Policy
Pragmatic? Tough?
He blabbed to the world that he told Putin not to escalate before he takes office. That’s just stupid negotiating, putting Putin on the spot like that. Of course in order to save face Putin had to escalate with a bigger wave of missiles on Kyiv. What a doofus. Speak loudly and carry a limp stick, I guess.
And if the CNN report about Kellogg’s proposal is correct, he is going to reduce sanctions on Russia in order to rid himself of any leverage he has in getting Russia to agree to a final proposal.
Trump has done some good in addition to not being Hillary/Biden/Harris, but tough and pragmatic are not what he’s aspiring to this time.
That was reported by the WaPo on Nov 10 (which then other media outlets dutifully regurgitated, of course), which cited that ever so reliable source: “people familiar with the call”.
How charming that, after all this time, you place such faith in the veracity/accuracy of what that paper emanates, especially when it comes to Trump.
Oh, I have a “slight” feeling that Putin was reacting to the volley of ATACMS that Ukraine, having finally received Biden’s (or whoever the acting President has been) blessing, lobbed into Bryansk on Nov 19, rather than to the conversation that he and Trump had had 10 days earlier.
Even CNN would not be inane enough to report what you just claimed, for the simple reason that even their audience is not inane enough to believe that Trump is aiming to “rid himself of any leverage” before negotiations even begin. Good golly.
Have they now? I wonder if you’d be kind enough to point to, say, 3 instances of such “refutations”.
Or, the West spent 20 years trying to turn those countries into something they never were before, Western democracies.
Ultimate failure after a 20 year babysitting period in Afghanistan, and moderate success in Iraq.
Iraq is like the new hot spot, Syria, in that the group exclusively in charge is a minority of the population. The USA has to be wide-eyed about messing with those situations and be very careful about how “success” is defined.
I don’t think that is correct. In Iraq, the Shia are the majority. Contrast that with Syria, in which the regime is dominated by Alawites – who are only 10-13% of the population and are considered heretics by most Muslims.
Sorry about the confusion. I should have said “was” for Iraq being lead by a minority. Not sure anybody is really in charge there now.
Iran. We are geniuses.
“Russia is weighed down by alcoholism, a lack of development, out-of-date infrastructure, an economy on the brink and a rapidly aging population.”
Economy on the brink? Well, that sometimes happens there.
However, they’ve got a lot more problems than that, like assassinations.
Many suspicious deaths since 2022:
Director of Transport of Gazprom, the largest company in Russia
Deputy Chairman of Novatek, Russia’s second-largest natural gas producer
Chairman of Lukoil, September 2022
Chairman of Lukoil, October 2023
Vice president of Lukoil, March 2024
Editor-in-chief of Komsomolskaya Pravda, September 2022
Deputy editor-in-chief of Komsomolskaya Pravda, December 2023
Director of Aviation of the Russian Far East
Head of the Moscow Aviation Institute
Vice President of Gazprombank
Deputy of the State Duma
Co-founder of Libertex, a cryptocurrency
Foreign Minister of Belarus (2012–2022)
Director General of the Admiralty Shipyards
Co-founder of Urals Energy
Co-creator of the Soviet hydrogen bomb
Lieutenant-general of Air Defence Forces
Village head of Motyzhy, Ukraine (war)
Mayor of Kreminna, Ukraine (war)
Mayor of Hostomel, Ukraine (war)
People’s Deputy of Ukraine (war)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspicious_deaths_of_notable_Russians_in_2022%E2%80%932024
Late, but More on Russia’s problems in education:
https://www.aei.org/research-products/journal-publication/the-russian-paradox-high-education-low-human-capital/
“Despite levels of schooling comparable to other European countries, and to developed countries in other regions, Russian adult mortality levels are no better than “Third World”, and by some measures, actually look “Fourth World”, e.g. in countries with the lowest level of socio-economic development. Furthermore, despite its sizeable cadre of highly educated men and women, Russia also appears to have serious problems with “knowledge creation”. Projections suggest Russia’s working-age adult mortality profile will remain unfavorable for decades to come, and that Russia’s global share of highly educated manpower is set to decline over the coming generation”
Mark Steyn addressed these problems and much more in “America Alone” and in his Best Interview Ever, Of Anyone, By Anyone, On Any Subject, on Northern Alliance Radio Network in December 2006.
Best overview of Russia’s tank & AFV arsenal: