“Under Crooked Joe Biden, the world is in flames, our border is overrun,
inflation is raging, Europe is in total chaos, the Middle East is exploding,
Iran is emboldened, China is on the march, and the worst, most incompetent,
most corrupt president in history is going to drag us into World War III.”
Donald Trump, at a Racine, Wisconsin MAGA rally
June 18, 2024
Donald Trump, Shut Up!
If anything presently on the horizon could ignite a “WWIII” it’s Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, an obvious observation unobserved in Trump’s quote above. If Trump is truly concerned about a worldwide conflict, and not just fear mongering, then a solution to the Ukrainian-Russian war is essential. In that vein, Trump might consider calling for (1) a Russian withdrawal, (2) a Ukrainian surrender, (3) meaningful peace talks, or (4) at the least, a ceasefire. After all, the task would be a snap. He brags about how one phone call to Putin and Zelensky would lead directly to a satisfactory ending based on (Trump’s idea) Ukraine simply surrendering half of its country. Because why? Zelensky will listen to him attentively because . . . Trump’s big brain. As for Putin, he’s a buddy and totally respects Trump’s, well, his big brain. Didn’t Vlad express that respect and bonhomie in 2023?
“We surely hear that Mr. Trump says he will resolve all burning issues within several days, including the Ukrainian crisis. We cannot help but feel happy about it.” Vladimir Putin remark at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, Russia, September 2023.
At the time, Trump – stupidly interpreting Putin’s cheekily ironic statement as something more than a glaringly obvious insult – jumped in with both paws, “I like that he said that, because that means what I’m saying is right. I would get him into a room. I’d get Zelensky into a room. Then I’d bring them together. And I’d have a deal worked out.” Zip, zap, zop. Just like that. After all, it’s essentially a real estate deal. Irony aside, in fact, Trump’s magical thinking, hyperbolic personality, and sense of omnipotence are dangerous threats to Ukraine’s survival, and if one needs a WWIII scenario, to the world’s survival.
And then there’s Tommy Tuberville . . .
Tommy Tuberville, Shut Up!
On another madcap front in the MAGA universe, the one where Putin is a good guy, Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville threw in on this topic a few weeks ago. Appearing on the soon-to-be jailbird Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast, Tuberville, the nation’s stupidest senator, after referring to Volodymyr Zelensky as a “dictator,” spewed forth:
“Putin’s just kind of sitting back, watching what’s going on, wondering when y’all gonna come over and we’ll draw a line here. He doesn’t want Ukraine, he doesn’t want Europe. He’s got enough land of his own. He just wants to make sure that he does not have United States weapons in Ukraine pointing at Moscow.”
Of course, Tuberville is right that Russia doesn’t want “United States weapons in Ukraine pointing at Moscow.” Nonetheless, we can be safe in assuming that Putin knows he already has U.S. weapons pointed at him within Europe. As of April 2024, the United States had the largest number of active military personnel in NATO countries, with almost 1.33 million troops and their accompanying accoutrements like artillery, tanks, and other unpleasant things. Moreover, we have approximately 100 tactical nuclear weapons in NATO countries. And, of course, there are American “weapons pointed at him” in Ukraine because Putin invaded Ukraine, some billions of dollars worth soon to be supplemented by F-16 fighter jets. So, if Putin really doesn’t want weapons in Europe pointed at Moscow, then stop being such a juvenile delinquent; start that transformation by getting the hell out of Ukraine!
As for Tuberville’s comment that Putin “doesn’t want Ukraine, he doesn’t want Europe. He’s got enough land of his own,” the comment is belied by the fact that he has numerous soldiers, a Baltic fleet, and an air force there. So, Tuberville’s comment is not remotely reality based, it’s startlingly stupid, and other demeaning terms. Nevertheless, one part of his asinine comment bears examining, “He’s got enough land of his own.” That, too, is both incorrect and stupid, and also belied by his assault on, and occupation of, the second largest country in Europe. Apparently, Russia’s nearly seven million square miles is, Senator Tuberville, not “enough land.”
Putin desires and needs a geographical border, one that can threaten NATO, and provide an economic influx to aid Russia’s lagging economy. Economic theft was among Putin’s reasons for invading Ukraine, especially when he believed he would achieve an easy victory. Lacking that he seems stuck there for the long haul, between a rock and a hard place. Certainly, Ukraine can provide a significant economic input, for example, in 2014, he stole Crimea and grabbed its famous port city Sevastopol, a prize for his fleet. And certainly, should he own all Ukraine, his defense from NATO would be vastly strengthened, especially since, as a part of Russia, Ukraine would therefore never be a NATO country. In a strong sense, it is all about land, and wanting more, Senator Tuberville.
Trump’s Giant Brain Isn’t Up to the Task
Nevertheless, we ought to be wary of viewing Ukraine as simply a land grab by an empire-hungry Vladimir Putin. Certainly, that is a motivation; I believe his (very) long-term aim is to reform the soviet boundaries. That may, in fact, have been his initial objective, a beginning of the rebirth of a new Russian empire, modeled after the Soviet Union. If so, his failure to quickly defeat all of Ukraine has consequences, both militarily and macroeconomically, both strategically and tactically, both long term and short term. All this is a huge setback to his grand design.
Given the staggering human costs of the nearly two-year war thus far, one can see that Putin’s unmoved by the demand that he withdraw, and he will likely continue in this vein. Human and economic costs, it’s well known, are mammoth, and if the war – win, lose, or draw – were to end tomorrow, long term Russian macroeconomic costs in GDP terms are a huge concern, and these costs unabated by a swift victory, have already injured the welfare of the Russian people (an ongoing internally destabilizing event).
In December 2023, RAND Corporation reported, “As of September 2022, researchers estimated military costs reached $40 billion. Full-year 2022 gross domestic product losses amounted to between $81 billion and $104 billion and full-year financial capital destruction reached $322 billion. Direct military spending may amount to almost $132 billion through 2024.” Statista, on May 3, 2024, reported that Russia’s GDP dropped from $2.27 trillion (2022) to $1.99 trillion for 2023, a ten percent decline accounted for by both Ukraine invasion sanctions and war costs. That’s a very meaningful drop, and Russia, literally, cannot afford it given its lack of export product diversity and the many economic sanctions in place.
Of course, as far as the victim, Ukraine, is concerned, its costs are staggering, both ongoing and long term. Its 2021 its GDP dropped from $200 billion to $160 billion for 2022, a 20% decrease. It’s 2023 GDP, perhaps counterintuitively, increased due to a better harvest, additional government spending, increased defense spending, and improved electricity access (yet, recently, Russia has increased its targeting of Ukraine’s electricity infrastructure). Moreover, according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), not surprisingly, “Ukraine, however, remains dependent on foreign assistance. According to the [International Monetary Fund] IMF, Ukraine requires in 2023 $3-4 billion in monthly financial assistance from international partners, including the [International Finance Institutions] IFIs, to maintain necessary government functions amidst the ongoing conflict. . . Other programs including the World Bank’s multi donor trust fund (MDTF) which facilitates channeling grant resources from donors. The United States is the largest donor to the MDTF, contributing $10.3 billion. Other donors are Germany ($50 million), Spain ($48 million), Finland ($21 million), Switzerland ($10.5 million), Belgium ($3 million), and Iceland ($1 million).” Foreign assistance enthusiasm may wane in a forever war, and already has in the U.S. given the GOP/MAGA warlike resistance to aiding Ukraine.
Moreover, for both combatants and the world economy, in the end, who will bear the costs of rebuilding a post-war Ukraine? Thus far, as of December 2023, the World Bank Group estimates reconstruction costs at $486 billion over the next ten years. Should Russia prevail or lose, those costs, in a legal and moral sense, ought fall to Russia, yet, if those costs continue for an extended time and reach a trillion dollars or more, Ukraine’s reconstruction will be a worldwide economic challenge, since a trillion dollars is roughly one-half Russia’s present GDP, an unsustainable drag on its economy. In any event, even should major financial institutions, countries, and non governmental organizations like the World Bank chip in, Russia’s economy will be facing large reconstruction costs that will stymie its GDP growth for an extended period. As we say, “It’s the economy, stupid!” and, despite its grievous fault, Russia cannot be allowed to sink into an economic depression, that would be destabilizing on a grand scale, i.e., a cornered bear, an existential threat to Russia, and, thereby, a certifiable World War III scenario.
So, in the end, if Trump does seek to avoid World War III, the war he accused Biden of courting, then his efforts ought to be directed at something he’s intellectually and constitutionally incapable of, for example, sensible solutions. But we know him, his diplomatic skills begin and end in this, “I would get him into a room. I’d get Zelensky into a room. Then I’d bring them together. And I’d have a deal worked out.” That is simply preposterous, the blathering of a dangerous psychopath with no conception of consequences.
