I apologize to anyone who feels this thread is not investment related, and I don't know what category it was started in, but as this is a much more reasonable audience to have this discussion with ( compared to Twitter or FB) I would appreciate it if we could continue. I do think unless the conflict ends quickly ( which is unlikely unless Pootin is "disappeared") it could push the world into a recession, because of commodity prices and supply chain disruptions. There are also implications for emerging markets, climate change, and big tech, all of which have to confront the potential "end of globalization"
@Old_JoeIn international relations, there really is no "legal agreement" that is enforceable. Treaties are supposedly not to be broken, but the Russians track record since
19
17 is abysmal.
Many people ( including my peace loving Connecticut farm girl Mother) believed we should have used military force against the Russian blockade in
1948, considering Russia did not have a functional atomic bomb until
1949. Taking the airlift way out convinced Stalin that the West was war weary and would not fight to protect democracies in the west. Thus started the Cold War.
Our obligations to Ukraine stem from the Budapest Memorandum, which convinced them it was safe to give up their extensive nuclear arsenal. To convince them to do so, US and NATO agreed to protect them from future Russian aggression. While the language does not specifically say NATO will use military force, it clearly commits us to an obligatory defense of Ukraine in today's circumstances.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukrainehttps://www.npr.org/2022/02/21/1082124528/ukraine-russia-putin-invasion"But they were told at the time that the United States and Western powers — so certainly at least the United States and Great Britain — take their political commitments really seriously. This is a document signed at the highest level by the heads of state. So the implication was Ukraine would not be left to stand alone and face a threat should it come under one.
So they had this faith that the West would stand by them, or certainly the United States, the signatories, and Great Britain, would stand up for Ukraine should it come under threat."
In great power politics, intent and projection count, as do standing up to your commitments. While Biden has done a great job unifying NATO and using sanctions to destroy the Russian economy, this will probably not be enough to force Pootin to peace talks. He apparently is willing to destroy Ukraine. A continued war only makes sense if Pootin believes Russia can withdraw economically from the world, confiscate any property of Western firms that refuse to do business with him, and rely on it's energy and commodity resources ( and China) to outlast the West's ability to isolate him. So far it looks as this is his game plan.
From what I have read, most people think the West's united response has given the Chinese significant pause concerning Taiwan. But all it may have done is convince China that the West will not fight to defend Taiwan, and as long as China's economy and foreign reserves are isolated enough from western sanctions they can eventually go ahead. This may take another decade. Hopefully in that time the US can become "chip independent" and eliminate the need for 50% of our chips coming from Taiwan. But this doe little to alleviate our dependence on Chinese sources for rare earths etc.
There is a large amount of insightful military analysis of the Russian debacle so far on the internet. Logistics are their weak spot and may prove to be their downfall.
I recommend reading Maj General Mike Ryan( Australian)
@Warinthefuture or mickryan.com.au
https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/It gets into the weeds about the track gauges of the European vs Russian railroads.
