How we get inside Putin's brain
#401
Friend of Democracy,
There is a simple insight in economics:
Humans can never fully determine the consequences of their actions. At least not when other people are involved. Because these other people also have desires and motivations, and every action depends on the actions of others.
Example.
I want to sell my old iPhone for the highest possible price, but I can only find someone who will pay 100 euros, so I am faced with the choice of either selling it for 100 euros or keeping it. My action, therefore, takes place under certain conditions (the willingness of others to buy), and at the same time, my action (to sell or not to sell) influences other people (someone will eventually get my iPhone and will have to pay 100 euros).
This is how economics puts it:
The individual acts, but alone controls neither the conditions of action nor the consequences of action.
Economics calls this the concept of the unintended consequences of intentional actions.
Why this theoretical preamble?
Because this logic applies to all people. From those with little power to act to dictators like Vladimir Putin.
Which brings us to the topic at hand.
Good policies, rules, and laws are characterised by promoting as many beneficial interactions between people as possible and as few harmful ones as possible.
Nowhere is the damage greater than in war.
Good rules to prevent wars are the most important of all social goals.
But how can war be prevented? Or, if it has already begun, how can it be ended? Like the one in Ukraine.
From the beginning of the war, the West’s strategy of military support for Ukraine has been to supply enough weapons for the invaded country to defend itself, but not enough for Ukraine to win. In addition to concerns about the high costs of a win strategy, there was the fear that a cornered dictator Putin would resort to last resorts.
But a strategy of self-defence lacks a long-term perspective. The war is taking place in a country defending itself. If infrastructure is constantly destroyed and people are killed for years, resistance will decline in the long run.
Now, it seems, Putin has dictated a supposed peace plan to the US president. Whether Trump is following Russia’s war aims because he believes it will allow him to continue telling his story of being the peace president, or whether Putin has leverage over Trump, we may never know. What we do know is that accepting this supposed peace plan would essentially amount to Ukraine’s surrender. Ceding even territories that Putin’s Russia has not occupied, a significantly reduced Ukrainian army, no weapons that could threaten Russia, no accession to NATO – such a “peace plan” would be an invitation to Putin to conquer the whole of Ukraine at the next opportunity. And it would be an invitation to Putin not to stop there.
Such a peace plan, including the actions of the West, signals to Putin that not only are they no real threat to his power, but that, despite some resistance from the West, he can achieve his war aims in the long term.
What can we learn from this?
That you cannot defeat an imperialist dictator simply by defending yourself against him. You impress him when you are in a position to threaten the dictator’s existence. Only then will they seriously consider, in the first place, if it is worth starting a war.
Having said this, it is clear that our future actions can still influence Putin’s thinking and therefore his actions. Namely, by building an army and having equipment that makes it clear to Putin that if he attacks us, his very existence will be at stake.
We do not know whether this will be enough to prevent a Russian war with other European countries. However, only if the Russian dictator sees the danger that another war poses to his power will he refrain from it.
Whatever Putin may think, the facts are currently as follows:
Russia is arming itself at a pace that will enable it to wage war sooner rather than later. Almost a hundred years ago, it took Adolf Hitler just six years to transform a country with literally no army into a military force that conquered nearly all of Europe.
It is wise not to bet that the current arms build-up in Putin’s Russia serves any other purpose.
See you in Democracy,
Johannes Eber