Interesting (if true) - Economist is in the major leagues in terms of reliability. There is a “They”, and it’s probably the intelligence services. And the actual method would probably be less dignified than a hanging.
Not only is there a “they”, but it says Putin is entirely self-aware about the situation, and that he understands that he is personally accountable for this war.
This isn’t an optimistic post - frankly the grim truth has always seemed that this industrial murder festival will go on as long as he does. Russia of the last hundred years has been essentially a crime syndicate. To say he’s a Tsar kind of misses the point - the REAL power is the intelligence servies, and the Tsar-proxy is kind of a figurehead.
If he said this, it’s very telling. He knows the war is going badly, he knows his life is personally depenent on the outcome, he fears “they”, he wants to live and he doesn’t know what to do. Seems highly likely he’ll conitnue to escalate until…? Russian history suggests that when things don’t go well, they purge the leader and put all the blame on him in retirement. Don’t think Putin will get the “Kruschev Dacha Retirement” package - he’s done WAY too much damage.
Hopefully “They” are paying attention too, and are getting tired of the lack of progress.
You are very kind! But my two cents isn’t chest thumping triumph in the near term. Quite the opposite. Sort of.
The point of the Economist article is that he fully understands it’s going badly, he understands he is not conquering Ukraine, but the scary part is is completely commited to - put simply - getting more in order to stay alive. It would be better for the world if he continued bashing his brains in against Ukraine chasing a delusional theory of victory.
The fact that they’re unable to advance in Ukraine GREATLY increases the chances he attacks the Baltics, and I mean soon. Like, in the next 1-2 months. And the point of that attack isn’t to take and hold territory.
It’s to try and salvage exposing NATO Article 5 as toothless words on a page. This window of a hollow ‘victory’ is a sweet spot of Trump still holding all the levers of power in the US until the midterms, and the relative unpreparedness of strong, unilateral NATO respons to an attack on Latvia, Lithuania and/or Estonia. Most serious minded thinkers agree that even a U.S. exempt response by European NATO partners will smash the current version of the Russian army in the case of a Baltic invasion.
But that’s not the point. Trump holds the U.S. out of Baltic attack, some Danes, Canadians stationed there die. Finland and Poland probably say “fuck it” and immediately implement air strikes because clearly it’s better to fight an inevitable opponent in someone else’s yard instead of your own. What do Paris, Berlin, London and Rome do? Who knows. They don’t have a lot of new capabilities to offer Ukraine, just more of what they’re already providing. I don’t see those large European NATO forces putting boots on the ground in the Baltics, at least not right away while they assess what Crazy ol’ Vlad is doing. Maybe they sink a few ships in the Baltic fleet and seize more shadow fleet vessels. Trump is going to die - soon. And he might be neutered politically before then. It’s urgent that Russia move while their armies are deployed and he exists to interfere with a unified Western response to their brazen attacks.
Point is - Russia is already pot committed to this war. It has become existential for their miserable hell on earth petromafia project. A defeated, post Putin Russia is headed for a power struggle, and EVERYONE understands that. They have more pragmatic cruelty unifying them than we give them credit for. Russia won’t be any stronger than they are right now for another centrury.
All that to say - he hasn’t made his last move. He will probably invade the Baltics in the next 1-2 months, regardless of a military outcome, and claim the prize is shattering NATO unity and further eroding U.S. partisan politics. Whether that would be enough for “They” to let him live is highly debatable, as that seems a goal of personal vengeance more than it does an issue of Russian strategic triumph.
Moreover, invading the Baltics essentially means much less pressure on the Ukrainian lines, and gives the UA options to think about their next steps. Opening even a brief new offensive will suck scarce resources away from the current fronts. Whatever support Ukraine is getting today might be enhanced signficantly if Russia invades the Baltics, even after that portion of the attack is brief.
But what do I know? What’s your thoughts?