We are now in the midst of the first war not involving Third World nations since 1945. The United States and the USSR prepared frantically for such a war in the 1950s and early 1960s and continued to do so until 1989. For much of that period they and their allies had large conscript armies, trained by men who had fought in the Second World War, or, in the US case, in Korea or Vietnam. Now neither Russia nor the US nor anyone else, really, has an army trained by men who have fought in a conventional war on the scale of the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
Meanwhile, respect for governmental authority peaked in the Soviet Union around the time of the death of Stalin, and in the United States in 1965. In the USSR such respect collapsed completely in the late 1980s and took the whole regime down with it. In the United States the decline took away the military draft as early as 1973 and has spread through the population with the encouragement of our educational establishment for five more decades. That is why so many Americans on the right have refused to follow government directives during the current pandemic, while so many on the left regard our society as a racist and/or patriarchal conspiracy. Putin's Russia has been trying to restore some traditional values in opposition to trends in the West, but I have no idea how successful that has been. Now Putin has put his nation to a severe test, and it is not certain that they will pass it.
Although the invasion of Ukraine appears to be making slow but steady progress, it has not gone according to plan. Putin seems to have anticipated an immediate collapse of Ukrainian authority--the same mistake that Hitler made, ironically, when he invaded the USSR in 1941. Instead the Ukrainian people have rallied around the government that they established 30 years ago, and their soldiers are fighting valiantly for independence. The Russians are having trouble supplying their forces and we have many reports of very unhappy soldiers who had no idea what lay in store for them. That problem could get worse. Millions of Russians also seem to be unhappy at home. Non-Communist Russia has a history of collapsing politically under the stress of war, most notably in 1905 and 1917. Putin's Russia, meanwhile, depends far more on international trade and finance than Tsarist Russia did. It is not impossible that its oligarchs could turn against Putin, just as some aristocrats turned against Nicholas II after he left Moscow for the front.
This is, as I have said before, a fateful moment for the world. If Putin can absorb Ukraine he will have re-established authoritarian rule as an effective alternative in the developed world, and he will probably have solidified his regime. He will also have re-established warfare as a normal tactic in international affairs, with probable further consequences both in Europe and in Asia. If however he fails militarily and politically, it will confirm the long-term decline of political authority that began 50-60 years ago. The NATO governments, meanwhile, are foregoing a chance to re-establish their prestige by intervening successfully on behalf of Ukraine--a possibility I will discuss in another post. The world will of course breathe a sigh of relief if Putin loses his gamble, and, potentially, his hold on power. Yet that will leave us in an era of politically weak governments that face other very serious problems such as climate change that they must solve. In the next few months we will learn a lot more about the nature of the world in which we now live.
4 comments:
Professor
The West had needed, certainly by 1905, as I have argued elsewhere, to have maintained its control, in every sense, over the Rest, including developmentally, rather than to have released it, or allowed it to proliferate in the East. The Russo-Japanese War was the event that should have made this crystal clear back then. The Boxer Rebellion was another event that should have opened eyes in the West.
The Rest should not have been boomed or industrialized, or allowed to do so, against the grain of its traditional cultures and economies. It still should not.
This is not an argument about what is or is not good for the Rest, but rather about the course of Western security needs and requirements themselves, and for the maintenance of authority, Western authority, anywhere.
A good example of how this Asian copycat "boom" attempt was done, disastrously, by the developmental Rest itself, but with our help, in both the USSR and China, is the forced collectivizations (5 Year Plans, etc) and mass exterminations by Stalin, in Ukraine and elsewhere.
One can do the same analysis for China developmentalism.
All the best
Looking at this from a generational standpoint we see Russia, Balkans, Turkey on a WWI to 2000 cycle while EU, Japan, Anglo- Saxons on a WWII to now cycle. Russia left its winter with Putin's ascension to presidency. America started its decline with Bush Jr.'s election. Biden withdrawal from Afghanistan was the beginning of American spring and renewal. Summer for Russia is Ukraine conflict until 2040. The build back better, MAGA is similar to how Russia felt after decades of decay in 2000. American expansion abroad is over. Chinese, Russians , India, Arabs, etc will ignore sanctions diktat. Perhaps Taiwan will go to China( they seem to have a 1950-2030 generational cycle so this is tricky, maybe a struggle could ensue there?). If Russia sanctions backfire badly on the West leaving the world fleeing the Dollar this could give an opportunity for democratic renewal in America. A reserve currency allows endless debt financing. When people live from hard work they behave more rationally, morally.
I disagree with your statement that our educational system is the cause of respect for government declining. I see several more important factors, such as corruption within the government (Nixon, Clinton), the marriage of government and big money, loss of real representative government, and 24/7 propaganda.
As for NATO, I'm glad they are not choosing open warfare against Russia. NATO was formed before Russia had nuclear capability. They seem to realize that wars can be won without firing a shot. Their use of sanctions instead of all-out warfare is simply wise strategy at this stage.
It was a huge mistake for NATO to have ever considered allowing Ukraine into NATO. America went crazy -- and rightly so -- when Khrushchev installed missiles in Cuba. Similarly, Putin and Russia don't want a NATO country along 1000 miles of their boarder. Both are totally understandable from a defense perspective.
Nothing I am saying justifies Putin's invasion of Ukraine. But it does help us understand what rational options NATO and the US have. I'm actually amazed that NATO has functioned so well during this crisis. The unified sanctions of NATO countries against Russia are devastating to Russia.
Just my perspectives. Time will soon tell us if NATO has been wise or foolish.
Professor
Daniel Sjursen makes such a Woke Pig's Breakfast of all American and European history, in A True History of the United States, that someone might wonder whether he might be a Russia or China asset!
Post this? Your call!
All the best
Post a Comment