Category Archives: defense policy

Reckless Putin

Posted on by
Reply

The Wall Street Journal‘s editors are fretting about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and that war-of-Putin-choice’s closing approach to NATO territory. They conclude their worry beads fingering with this bit:

No one wants a broader war. But as Russia escalates, Mr Biden and NATO had better be prepared to fight one. A reckless or desperate Mr Putin may give them no choice.

Putin is far from reckless or desperate, except under the foolish Western assumptions that Putin thinks like we do, has the same pain points we have, has the same value sets we have. Putin, on the contrary, has been quite clear and steadfast all along. He intends to reconstitute Russia’s former USSR empire, complete with regaining control over the outer, occupied nations, like Russia-controlled Poland and German Democratic Republic, and others. Those nations, along with so many of the ex-SSRs, are now members of NATO.

Putin’s push into NATO will come in accordance with his goals, and there’s no maybe to it. Western governments hide their heads in the Irrational Putin sand at their—and us citizens’—peril.

A Step

Posted on by
Reply

The Securities and Exchange Commission is thinking about requiring publicly traded companies “promptly” to report data breaches and other significant cybersecurity incidents; “promptly” meaning within four days. Targeted companies, further, would be required to provide periodic updates about previous incidents and to report when a series of previously undisclosed, individually immaterial cybersecurity events has become material in the aggregate.

SEC Chairman Gary Gensler:

Cybersecurity incidents, unfortunately, happen a lot. Thus, investors increasingly seek information about cybersecurity risks, which can affect their investment decisions and returns.

Good to see Captain Sort of Obvious is more or less on top of this. There’s more to it, though, than just investment decisions.

Hacking our businesses aren’t only detrimental to the targeted companies. They’re far too often deliberate, coordinated attacks across industries, and so are threats to our national security. The attacks, even if done in isolation from each other by independently acting criminals (which is what hackers are), far too often aggregate into a threat to our national security.

Requiring reporting within four days is an improvement over the current weeks to months of delay. However, at the speed with which a hack attack can proceed through networks and across the Internet to other networks—especially with the cloud so ubiquitously in the middle—it’s necessary for the attacked business to report the fact of the attack immediately, not some convenient period of time later.

The rule should be expanded, too; although the expansion I suggest would be beyond the SEC’s ken, and so it would need to be enacted by Congress: private companies should be required to report such attacks, also, and just as promptly.

Russia, No-Fly Zones, and War

Posted on by
Reply

Highly touted Russia expert Rebekah Koffler ridiculed the idea of a no-fly zone being erected over Ukraine. Her disdain is not at all centered on practicalities—basing, logistics, etc—but on fear of war with Russia.

The Hill: Foreign policy experts call for ‘limited no-fly zone’ over Ukraine
Same “experts” who got UKR-RUS into this conflict in the first place, by promoting foolish ideas, not grounded in reality.
Now dragging us into WWIII.

And

If the “experts” believe a no-fly zone will make Putin stand down, they are dumb.
If they are running a PSYOP on Putin, it will have the opposite effect. Putin doesn’t think like an American. He thinks like a Russian.
P will interpret the move as escalatory, not de-escalatory.

Koffler’s underlying thesis that Putin doesn’t think like us is right. But in her terror of confronting Putin with a no-fly zone over Ukraine, she wants us to back away from a Putin threat of war against us. Talk about “dumb as a Siberian shoe….”

Her position raises the question: what are her recognition keys for when it is…appropriate…for us to stop backing away from Putin and instead to stand and confront him?

This “Russia expert” is carefully silent on matter. Maybe she’s not dumb as a Siberian shoe…. Maybe it’s more that As a lamb she sitteth meke and stille, as leef on lynde.

The Collapse of the Ruble

Posted on by
Reply

Much is being made of the collapse of the Russian ruble since the sanctions with which we’ve answered Russia’s invasion of Ukraine went into effect. Here’s the US Dollar-Russian Ruble exchange rate over the last month (as of 6 March 2022):

For context, here is the performance of the ruble against our dollar since 30 January 2012:

The current drop is sharp, but so far, it looks a lot like the drop in the latter half of 2014—when sanctions were going in over Russia’s first invasion of Ukraine and its occupation of Donbas and Crimea, and following which the ruble more or less stabilized into a (very) slow degradation vis-à-vis our dollar.

The current round of sanctions are important, and the further devaluing of Russia’s ruble are important, but history suggests that the exchange rate will once again more or less stabilize without changing Russia’s behavior.

Concrete support for Ukraine remains critical, and that concrete action includes sharply increasing the transfer of arms—including combat aircraft and more capable anti-aircraft batteries than just (but not instead of) Stingers—transfer of offensive weapons, so that Ukraine can drive the barbarians back out of their nation; and a cessation of the Biden-Harris’ constant retreat whenever Vladimir Putin threatens war against us.

There’s Debt, and There’s Debt

Posted on by
Reply

James Jay Carafano speculated on the lessons People’s Republic of China President Xi Jinping is learning from Russia President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. One of those lessons is the coming cost of bailing out Putin’s economy, should he win, lose, or draw in Ukraine, and should Xi choose to do a bailout.

Beijing’s buddy in Moscow is going to be an economic basket case. Even if Beijing wants to bail them out with their patent debt trap, that is going to cost a lot of money—likely more than the Chinese Communist Party can spare. Buying up Russia at fire-sale prices might be more than even Xi can manage.

Not necessarily. The People’s Republic of China and generations of the state of China before it have considered (Russian) Siberia to have been stolen from the Chinese. A few short years ago, Putin and Xi concluded an economic deal that has Russia and the PRC jointly exploiting eastern and southern Siberia’s vast resources, both on the ground (timber) and below it (ores, oil, natural gas, among others), with the vast bulk of the labor being Chinese, and with that Chinese labor (and their families) moving into Siberia to live and do the work.

One way to do the bailout, with its re-formed means of debt repayment, would be to alter the exploitation deal in the PRC’s favor. Sharply alter it.