Prof. of International Relations
@WestPoint_USMA
, banned from Russia. Member
@CFR_org
. Specialist on Russian & post-Soviet politics. Views & плов recipe my own.
“Why Putin Invaded Ukraine” - In this piece,
@McFaul
and I argue that a permissive balance of power, Putin’s personalist autocracy, and his anti-democratic & anti-Ukrainian ideology led him to launch his disastrous war - not NATO enlargement. Read it for free here:
Disappointed that
@NYTimes
has declared that “both sides have hard line positions.” There is nothing “hard line” about Ukraine wanting to be whole, free, and at peace. It is their right under international law.
Let me be clear: if Ukraine loses its war to Russia, it will be because we - the United States of America - made a deliberate choice to abandon them to the armies of a bloodthirsty tyrant. This is unacceptable - this is not who we are.
#StandWithUkraine
How long can Russia endure Western sanctions? A THREAD based on my research on the political economy of Russian grand strategy. Data from
@WorldBank
,
@IMFNews
and Russian Ministry of Finance. 1/
I'm puzzled by those who continue to call for restraint in our support of Ukraine, urging caution out of fear that this is developing into a "proxy war." Don't they realize that Russia has been waging a multi-domain war against us, our allies, and partners for years now?
THREAD: Here's why sanctioning the Central Bank of Russia could prove devastating - the true "nuclear" option in the West's financial arsenal. Russia currently holds about $640 billion in reserves. About 32% held in euros, 22% in gold, 16% in dollars, and 13% in Yuan. 1/
This chart shows the inflation-adjusted Russia's total reserves (monetary gold, special drawing rights, IMF reserves, and foreign exchange reserves held by central bank). Though they've risen in recent years, they also decline during recessions 10/
The Crimean Bridge is the key to unlocking Ukraine's victory, but destroying it is harder than you might realize.
@general_ben
and I joined two West Point engineering profs to analyze the challenges Ukraine faces in disabling it permanently 🧵1/
Misleading headline - Putin has never been interested in a “peace deal.” Since day 1 of this war he has demanded nothing less than unconditional surrender and complete subjugation of Ukraine. Don’t pretend otherwise.
“The time has come to understand that Russia cannot be stopped by persuasion, cooperation, appeasement or concessions. Russia takes such gestures as a sign of weakness, as permission to expand and intensify its onslaught.” -
@GitanasNauseda
The genocide deniers have been turning a blind eye since the Bucha massacre was revealed. Will Russia’s castration of Ukrainian POWs - literally sterilizing a nationality - finally convince them that Moscow is attempting the undeniable ethnic cleansing of Ukrainians? Horrifying.
But now we can also see his long-run strategy. Putin knows he can't compete by lifting Russia up to the level of his "peer" great powers. So he will do everything he can to tear down his top geopolitical rival - the United States - and its partners and allies globally. 25/END
Putin has spent 20 years trying to restore Russia’s sphere of influence in the former Soviet states. He’s managed to throw it all away in only 6 months. A “master strategist” indeed!
Twenty years ago a professor told me, "if you want a job in political science, don't study Russia. Nobody cares about Russia anymore - they're finished." I tell this story at the beginning of all my talks to make some points that I'd like to share with
#academictwitter
. 1/
Lots of people are arguing that Russia's accumulated financial reserves will allow it to weather sanctions comfortably for a long time. This is not true, and history (and data) show us why. 2/
Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz sent a clear message to
#Ukraine
and the world at the SPD party conference today.
Germany will not stop supporting Ukraine in the coming years, and Germany will have to do more if others let up.
@rubystar22
@nytimes
Yes, Russia can withdraw fully from the territory it’s illegally occupied since 2014; return all Ukrainians forcibly deported; and agree to pay reparations. Then they can negotiate over which Russian leaders will be tried for war crimes. Only then will there be peace.
My contacts in international finance are closely watching precious metals markets and other commodities for evidence of Russian-Chinese collusion to evade sanctions. It basically amounts to a giant money laundering scheme. Here's how it would work [thread]: 1/
I’d say the “dangerous health risks” of Russian occupation and genocide probably outweigh the nonexistent health risks of depleted uranium shells. Unless you’re sitting inside an invading tank in Ukraine’s crosshairs…
That's because Putin's corrupt control over directing the flow of Russia's resource wealth isn't a feature of the political system, it IS the political system. Recommend Fiona Hill and Clifford Gaddy's
@BrookingsPress
book on this 8/
It's not so much that Putin "buys" loyalty from his cronies with resource wealth. Its that he threatens to cut them off if they do not do as he directs. Blackmail is a better way to describe the relationship. See Karen Dawisha's excellent book 9/
So what does this all mean? It means that Russia has the reserves to withstand sanctions/recession for a while (a few years at best) but not forever. They do not have an infinite piggy bank, and many of the things they will have to spend on will burn up cash fast. 22/
NATO expansion didn’t cause Russia to invade Ukraine, and taking NATO membership off the table won’t end Russia’s war.
@McFaul
and I have the lead article in the latest
@JoDemocracy
issue, where we debunk the myth and set the record straight:
Not to nitpick with little things like “evidence” and “data,” but I’d wonder if Prof. Mearsheimer could provide us with any documented instances of nuclear use in the circumstances he describes. Not sure how he arrives at “likely” with a historical n=0.
Remember, all the money that Moscow is burning up in its war on Ukraine is money that will never go to things that could actually boost Russia's economic growth and development. Sanctions will also make it hard for private firms in Russia to secure Western funding too. 16/
The more I reread this, the angrier I get. As if the war in Ukraine passively “erupted” as a result of uncontrollable geological forces and not because of the choice of one man. Repeat after me: “Putin caused this war.”
Once Finland and Sweden join
@NATO
, Russia’s border with the alliance will have tripled in length, increasing from 316 to 952 miles. All thanks to a war that was supposed to stop NATO expansion. I think we can finally lay to rest the myth of Putin’s “strategic genius”
Russia's long-term strategic dilemma is evident in this graph. Mr. Putin, once you install your puppet regime in Kyiv, what's your plan for developing an economy that will allow you to compete as a truly "great power" in the multipolar order you think you're building? 24/
Most of that gold is held domestically and beyond the reach of sanctions. But about $300 billion in reserves are held abroad. Freezing those will prevent the Bank of Russia from using them for things like currency interventions or transfers to the Russian Treasury to spend. 2/
Notice that Russia has had to spend down its reserves pretty heavily after the 2009-10 global financial crisis and after the recession induced by Russia's 2014 invasion of Ukraine and subsequent sanctions. KEY POINT: this is not a bottomless piggy bank. 4/
It was never really about NATO. It was about how Putin could never allow a democratic, sovereign Ukraine to choose its own destiny. NATO wasn’t the problem, and neutrality isn’t the answer, as
@McFaul
and I argue in
@JoDemocracy
:
Those who argue that Ukraine should give up its desire to join NATO don’t understand Ukraine. At all.
It’s not about NATO, it’s about Ukraine having the right to decide its own fate. No one will take this away from us.
My article with
@McFaul
rebutting the realist argument that NATO expansion provoked Russia to invade Ukraine is now out (with updates) in the latest print issue of
@JoDemocracy
. Open access download until May 15. Our argument/evidence is in the 🧵👇 1/
Here's a chart of Russia's combined sovereign wealth funds. This is where Moscow saves money when energy prices are high and when they need to sterilize currency to avoid inflation. And this is what they spend from during recessions and budget shortfalls when oil prices drop. 3/
It also means that Russia's economy was facing headwinds already due to underinvestment, declining labor force, overdependence on oil revenue, and a corrupt political-economic system run for/by Putin and his cronies, who have NO INCENTIVE to reform it. 23/
But the size of Russia's reserve funds isn't just about how much they're spending. It's also about the price of oil. Lower oil prices since 2014 have meant less surplus revenue to save. In the months/years ahead, Russia's reserves will depend heavily on what oil prices do. 5/
After the 2014 invasion, Putin used these funds to prop up many of the individuals and entities (state-owned banks, etc) that were targeted by Western sanctions. This wasn't just about economic stimulus, it was about political support from & for his cronies. 7/
This means that Russia will have to face increasing costs for pensions, elderly health care, etc. in years to come while relying on fewer current workers to fund social welfare. Or, they can cut benefits and face a bunch of angry babushki in the streets. Terrifying thought. 19/
Moscow will need to spend heavily from these monetary reserves in order to prop up a ruble in freefall (as happened in 2014). Or, they'll have to give up and let the ruble slide. Ordinary Russians will be able to buy much less with a weak ruble - this could hurt pretty badly. 11/
Time for the US to do the same. If Congress is deadlocked on sending new aid to Ukraine, why not unlock the billions of oily Russian state assets frozen in our banks and send that to our Ukrainian allies as they fight for their survival and our security? Let’s go, Washington!
UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron: ‘instead of just freezing russia’s confiscated assets, let’s take them and spend them on rebuilding Ukraine’. Such a powerful standpoint should be put in practice.
Russia's demographic trends aren't encouraging either. Population continues to decline as deaths outnumber births for the last 30 years. Immigration isn't enough to offset these trends. 17/
Time to close this gap IMMEDIATELY. Anyone supporting Russia’s unjust war cannot be allowed to profit from the weapons killing Ukrainian soldiers and civilians! Report: Dozens of Russian weapons tycoons have faced no Western sanctions via
@Reuters
We're already seeing the ruble fall to its lowest levels ever as holders of rubles rush to exchange them for other currencies they think are safer stores of wealth. This is typical in crises - people trust dollars more than rubles to hold value. 3/
It's a tall order, but no single event could do more to change the trajectory of the war than effectively cutting Russia's supply lines to Crimea. But it's possible only if Ukraine gets the tools they need. It's up to us, and the clock is ticking! 21/
This is critical. Sweden and Finland must have rock-solid security guarantees from the moment their applications for
@NATO
membership are submitted. Nothing less will suffice.
This chart shows the inflation-adjusted Russia's total reserves (monetary gold, special drawing rights, IMF reserves, and foreign exchange reserves held by central bank). Though they've risen in recent years, they also decline during recessions 10/
100% correct. Putin will not negotiate if he thinks he is winning (or simply outlasting) in Ukraine. And any agreement he signs will be worthless - he won’t give up on turning Ukraine into a Russian zombie puppet (like Belarus) until he succeeds. Will we let him?
“Ukraine’s partners should move from a half-hearted to a full-throated offensive strategy that provides the embattled country with all the weapons necessary to gain the upper hand and push back Russian forces,” argues
@n_roettgen
.
In normal times (what are those?) the government is supposed to use these funds to finance the federal budget deficit (ie, planned spending) and long-term economic development projects. But they usually suspend these rules during crises and use them for off-budget stimulus 6/
We also know that Russia's federal budget is dependent on oil/gas revenue. This chart shows the budget deficit they would face if there were no energy money coming in. Economists say -4% or less is sustainable long-term. Russia hasn't hit that mark in 15 years. 12/
There's a lot of other long-run factors dragging on the Russian economy that will limit its ability to sustain long-term severe sanctions. Let's start with investment. The world already doesn't really want to invest its money in Russia. That won't change anytime soon. 14/
So if poli sci can't predict the future, what can we do? Invest in area studies for ALL regions so that in 20 years we will have experts ready to go wherever we need them. And invest in the liberal education that will develop the sharp, critical thinkers we'll need. 6/END
Russia's population is aging and in comparatively poorer health compared to other European countries AND countries with comparable GDP/pc. This chart shows the ratio of people over 64 as a proportion of the working-age population. Bottom line: more pensioners per worker. 18/
What happens if you have reserves but you can't access most of them for currency interventions? Or you're not allowed to exchange your dollars and euros for rubles? That's what sanctioning the Bank of Russia could do, and it would have the same effect: unchecked freefall. 11/
American ATACMS aren’t a silver bullet to bring down the Kerch bridge. But if Washington sends Kyiv enough, they could still tip the war in Ukraine’s favor. Find out how & why in our
@ForeignAffairs
article
@general_ben
If Putin starts wars to prevent NATO expansion, why attack Ukraine but not Finland on this momentous day?
@McFaul
and I show that Putin has long feared democratic revolution - not NATO. Regardless, welcome to the family, Finland!
@JoDemocracy
I will emphasize again that there are a lot of unknowns, contingencies, and confounding factors that make it hard to predict what will happen. But we've only ever sanctioned the central banks of Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea. So this *could* be a Really. Big. Deal. 19/
Sure, declining labor force can be offset by rising output, but Russia's labor productivity has barely budged upwards in the last 30 years. No reason to think govt. will invest in things that would boost productivity now that they're fighting a war/sanctions. 21/
A crashing ruble is bad for consumers: they get fewer imported goods for their rubles AND fewer domestic goods (reduced purchasing power). Put another way, it takes more rubles to buy the same stuff as before. That's called inflation, and it can get quite severe. 7/
But many Russians will probably continue to get paid in rubles, which won't be worth much for basic necessities. Remember those pictures from Weimar Germany of folks with carts full of worthless cash? It wouldn't look like that today, but the effect could be the same. 13/
Unfortunately Berlin won't give the Taurus to Ukraine, likely out of fear of escalation. But that fear is overblown, based on Putin's past actions. 16/
“The speed and unity to take this unprecedented financial action will give Putin pause,” said Josh Lipsky of the Atlantic Council. “The SWIFT move was largely expected but striking at the Central Bank will reverberate in Moscow and beyond.” 16/
That dependency will rise as they spend oil money from the reserves to cover what will be an expanding budget deficit due to likely recession and increased military expenditures. This dependence on energy revenue is another reason Moscow will be sensitive to oil price trends. 13/
In fact, most development investment in Russia comes from the state: the so-called "National Projects." Already on ice since COVID, these projects will see what little funding remains redirected toward Russia's war effort. 15/
Utterly despicable. What heartless cruelty to mock a people struggling for survival against an ongoing genocide. Disgusting - it makes me sick to my stomach.
ATACMS just don't pack enough punch. But German Taurus missiles might work. These bunker busters were designed to destroy hardened infrastructure with a two-stage warhead that could penetrate deeper into the bridge's main support columns. If they can get past defenses… 15/
Armed with enough missiles, Ukraine could regularly strike the more vulnerable bridge deck, taking the bridge out of service temporarily until Russian crews repair it. Then they strike it again. And again. Constant strikes would seriously hinder Russian mil logistics in UKR. 19/
So if destroying the bridge is out of reach for now, what is the best we can hope for? Ukraine's allies must provide cruise missiles (ATACMS, Taurus, Storm Shadows) with unitary warheads in FAR greater quantities than we have so far. It's a numbers game. 18/
But what happens when you burn through your reserves? You can't support your exchange rate by buying up excess rubles, and the currency crashes. That's what we saw in Russia in 1998, and that's what precipitated a major economic meltdown. 10/
This means that the market is being flooded with rubles that nobody really wants, so supply is increasing. Falling demand and rising supply means the "price" of the ruble is dropping, or weakening. 6/
High inflation is generally bad for economic growth, and hyperinflation is historically associated with severe recession/depression. That's bad for ordinary folks and, say, governments who are waging costly wars with their neighbors. 8/
Currencies are bought and sold on international foreign exchange markets. Like any traded good, their price (or exchange rate) is a function of supply and demand. Demand for the ruble is plummeting: people are selling them in exchange for dollars/euros. 5/
Eventually Russia's grip on Crimea would become unsustainable and the brutal occupation of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts would be starved of critical supplies. A dramatic collapse of Russian defensive lines - not to mention morale - would follow. 20/
Rubles could (in theory) become close to worthless, with ordinary citizens conducting exchange in dollars. That would have to be on the black market, since it's technically illegal to pay for things with dollars/euros directly. Dollars will be scarce & precious on the street. 12/
I'm just a political scientist. But below are some statements from economists on what sanctioning the Bank of Russia could lead to. Source of these quotes is this article: /15
This is just a *possible* scenario, and there are lots of factors that could influence things. China's willingness to exchange/transact in rubles might be one of them. Crypto is another. But until you can buy shashlyk on Arbat with bitcoin, you have to exchange it. 14/
This is why central banks often intervene in currency markets to stabilize their currency: spend your reserves (dollars, euros, gold, etc) and buy up rubles to reduce the supply and prop up the exchange rate. 9/
Ribakova continues, "This would likely lead to massive bank runs and dollarization, with a sharp sell-off, drain on reserves -- and, possibly, a full-on collapse of Russia’s financial system." 18/
Why is the bridge so important to Russia? Opened in 2018 and built at a staggering cost of almost $4bln, the bridge is a physical manifestation of Putin's neo-imperial ambitions. It also is a political symbol of the "🇷🇺❤️🇺🇦" fraternal myth supporting Russia's occupation 2/
"'Sanctioning Russia’s central bank is likely to have a dramatic effect on the Russian economy and its banking system, similar to what we saw in 1991,' said Elina Ribakova, deputy chief economist for the Institute of International Finance." Remember what that looked like? 17/
In order to permanently destroy the bridge, Ukraine would need an engineered demolition, carefully placing explosive charges on key weak spots throughout. They don't have the access to pull this off, but it's probably the first thing they'll do when they retake Crimea. 17/
But more than anything, the bridge is militarily important. Most of the troops, weapons, and supplies fueling Russia's occupation of southern Ukraine transit the bridge to reach supply hubs in Crimea and beyond. It is arguably *the* most important supply line for Russia's war 5/
The first attack in October 2022 involved a truck loaded with explosives that exploded near the middle of a span on the western section of the bridge. That ignited a passing fuel train, and the fire did a lot of damage to the vehicle and rail bridges. 7/
The Kerch Bridge is economically important to Russia too. By making it easy for Russian tourist to visit Crimea, it would help offset the huge budgetary burden of integration after 2014. 3/
In order to permanently disable or destroy the bridge, Ukrainian forces would need to deliver a devastating knockout blow to one of the massive concrete & steel piers that rise out of the water and support the road and rail decks. Turns out that's really hard to do. 10/
Building the bridge also relieved a key vulnerability by allowing goods and utilities to reach Crimea without having to transit Ukraine as before. Until the road and rail bridges opened, Kyiv could threaten to blockade the peninsula. Putin wanted to eliminate that leverage. 4/
There's a version of the ATACMS that carry a single warhead that we haven't given Ukraine yet. But even these probably don't have the explosive power to fatally damage one or more piers. Those piers are truly massive, heavily reinforced, and pretty robust. 13/
So it's not a surprise that Ukraine has targeted the bridge and pulled off two successful attacks. While both of those attacks temporarily shut down the bridge, they couldn't disable it permanently. Our article explains why that's harder than most people think. 6/
But missiles aren't the silver bullet many make them out to be. First, the ~20 ATACMS missiles Washington gave Kyiv are the wrong type: they're armed with cluster munitions (about 950 bomblets) that are great against many mil targets but ineffective against infrastructure. 12/
The second successful attack was in July 2023, when Ukraine was able to detonate a sea drone packed with explosives underneath a span running close to the water. It too did damage to the bridge deck, but the damage was again repaired pretty quickly. 9/
Sea drones aren't up to the task. They deliver an unconfined air blast that disperses their explosive energy in all directions. A relatively small percentage actually reaches the bridge structure. Enough to damage the deck, but not bring down a pier. 11/
.
@McFaul
and I have long argued that it was never really about NATO. As the world awakens to horrific images of Russian war crimes in Bucha, it is painfully obvious that Putin’s war aim was not just destruction of the Ukrainian state, but also its people.
In order to deliver a crippling blow, they'd have to get a massive salvo of missiles past Russian defenses to repeatedly hit weak points where the piers support the deck. That's a small target for a missile that on average lands 50% of its shots within 30 feet of its target. 14/
But here's the thing: the parts of the bridge that are easiest to damage, like the deck (roadway) and support beams are also the easiest to repair & replace. Limited one-way vehicle traffic resumed after a few days, even though full capacity wasn't restored for several months 8/
First, it shows that political scientists aren't very good at predicting the future. If anyone of my discipline ever gets too far out on a limb with their crystal ball, smile politely and excuse yourself to the bar. Theories help make predictions, but they're often wrong. 2/