Putin's Kursk Problem
There are a few things (as always) to discuss this week. Putin’s Kursk problem, loopholes in the sanctions, Russia goes after Argentina, and Trump’s continued relationship with Putin.
Ukraine’s invasion of the Russian region of Kursk in August changed the dynamics of the war. The symbolic effect of the offensive was immediately apparent. Now, as we enter the third month of the operation, we can see some of the other effects as well. First, according to Ukraine, Russia has redeployed 50,000 troops to the Kursk region. Most of these troops are from the occupied parts of Ukraine. Ukraine’s top general Oleksandr Syrskyi acknowledges that this has not led to a Ukrainian offensive advantage in eastern Ukraine but as provided some defensive advantages in certain areas.
In addition to the redployment of 50,000 troops, Ukraine and the U.S. have claimed that Russian casualties in the war have topped 600,000! Both of these situations have led to increased Russian recruitment efforts inside of Russia. For example, another Russian region bordering Ukraine, Belgorod, is offering potential recruits a one-time payment of $31,200 to sign up and fight in Ukraine. That is a lot of money and shows how desperate they are for additional troops. Russia is also looking for troops elsewhere. There are reports that North Korean troops are in Ukraine and that they are likely to send more.
The additional government spending, the continued presence of Ukrainian troops on Russian soil, the increasing reliance on countries like North Korea, and Putin’s silence on the issue results in a dangerous situation for Putin. Russia may have to take more drastic efforts to push Ukrainian troops out of Kursk, making their defenses in Ukraine more vulnerable and increasing the Russian risk of failure.
The economic sanctions placed on Russia since 2022 have been by almost any measure unprecedented. They were more comprehensive and restrictive than any set of sanctions ever implemented. There is a large debate about how successful they have been, but I don’t want to get into that right now (maybe later). What I want to point out is that sanctions often fail because they can be relatively easy to get around. Countries simply trade with a third country, who then ships the goods to Russia or Russian buyers travel to the third country to obtain the goods. For example, in the first year of the conflict German exports to Kyrgyzstan rose by 949%! Now, we are seeing an increase from countries like China and India exporting electronics and equipment that can be used for military purposes. Sanctions do not work unless they are universally enforced. And it is almost impossible to universally enforce sanctions, so they are almost always ineffective.
In an earlier post I discussed Argentinian President Javier Milei’s speech at the UN, where he criticized Russia (and the UN). While it turns out a good chunk of that speech was plagiarzed from the old TV show The West Wing, Milie’s consistent criticism of Putin’s invasion appears to have angered the Russian government. How do I know this? Because Russian media outlet Russia Today has started going after Argentina. As discussed in an earlier post, Russia Today is primarily used by Russia to magnify divisions within country in an attempt to create chaos and discord. Just look at the screenshot above and you can see how just about every story is framed to make “the west” look weak or divided and to sow doubt in support for Ukraine.
They had a social media post the other day higlighting protests in Buenos Aires. The students are protesting Milei’s decision to reduce budgets in universities. It may be a good or a bad decision, but what Russia is interested in is portraying the situation that Argentinian society is on the verge of revolution because of Milei. I am not here to defend Milei’s policies but I am here to say that the reality is always more complicated than Russia Today presents. For example, Argentinian monthly inflation has been in steady decline and is down to 3.5% in September. Maybe that’s because of Milei’s policies, maybe not, but Russian misinformation works by deemphasizing positive trends and magnifying negative trends. Something to remember when thinking about how Russian misinformation works inside of the U.S.
Finally, noted journalist Bob Woodward has a new book, War, coming out. As is customary, certain parts of the book are released before the actual books is available for sale. Most notably for us, the book reveals that Trump has spoken with Putin at least seven times since leaving office. Trump has denied the claims, for what it’s worth.
This revelation just adds to the growing list of evidence that a second Trump presidency would be bad for Ukraine. Here’s just a quick recap. The first Trump impeachment centered around Trump attempting to condition military aid to Ukraine on Ukraine digging up dirt on Joe Biden for Trump. Dirt that was related to a conspiracy theory fabricated by Russia. One of the criminal indictments of Trump is related to his removing classified information from the White House, keeping it at his home in Mar-A-Lago and refusing to cooperate when asked for it back. He called Putin from Mar-A-Lago and it is not unreasonable to think that perhaps Trump shared some of that information with Putin.
A New York Times story this week reminds us that when he was president, Trump did not really push back on Putin all that much. At a summit in 2017 Trump asked Putin if he should provide weapons to Ukraine, to which Putin replied no. He also said that they will just keep asking for more, which sounds a lot like Trump’s criticism of Zelensky. At that meeting, Putin said that Ukraine was a corrupt and fabricated country and even though Trump had been briefed with counterpoints he never pushed back against Putin’s assertions. At the famous Helsinki Summit in 2018, Trump famously said that he believed the word of Putin over U.S. intelligence services.
All of these situations demonstrate just how easily Trump can be manipulated by Putin, or how closely Trump’s own beliefs are aligned with Putin’s. Either way, this is a dangerous situation, not only for Ukraine, but for American interests globally. Trump famously promotes an “America first” foreign policy but if he believes Putin over his own intelligence agencies and asks Putin if he should provide military assistance to one of Putin’s opponents, is it really America first?