War and the Speed of History
Contrary to the predictions of some optimists, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine last week. Russian tanks rolled over the border, moving far past the initial separatist regions where they had shown the most interest early on. The intent is now clear: Russia wants to overthrow the western-leaning Ukrainian government and replace it with one more pliable to Russian interests. So far, the Ukrainian people have not acquiesced in that desire. Ukraine has put forth fierce resistance. According to Jonah Shepp on Monday, “the Russians have not established air superiority, taken control of any major population centers, or successfully demoralized the Ukrainians, even as the invasion has displaced millions and sent hundreds of thousands of refugees pouring over Ukraine’s western borders.”
War in Europe and Ukraine is a tragedy first and foremost. Ukrainian and Russian soldiers have already died along with Ukrainian civilians. It is impossible to know what the result of the war will be and what effect it will have on global politics. The potential questions are endless. Will Sweden and Finland join NATO? Will Putin threaten nuclear warfare? Will Poland be next? Predictions of the war’s impact have run the gambit from limited to wildly irresponsible. In situations such as these, it can be helpful to look at what has already happened and use the lens of history to provide context as to what the next steps may look like.
One unavoidable consequence of war is its ability to change the course of history in the blink of an eye. Wars introduce new social processes and vastly speed up those that had been previously operating. The United States is, of course, no stranger to this concept. Decades of abolitionist goals and Northern agitation were accomplished through the Civil War in four short years, fewer if one considers the successful Confederate performance up through 1862. The slow creak of autocratic empires in Europe, which had been declining for over a century, fell over four years during the First World War.
Smaller wars have decided the course of world history as well. Just one country, Russia, has been at the center of many of these. The war between Russia and Poland in the 1920s checked Soviet spread and ensured that central Europe would stay outside of the USSR. Russia’s 1956 invasion of Hungary put an end to the hope that the Soviet Union would fall following the 1953 death of Stalin. Afghanistan sped up the fall of the Soviet Union and was arguably the most important factor in that collapse.
Outside of social movements, war has put engineering, health, and weapons-related technologies on a fast track. The needs of the First World War led to revolutions in transportation technology and the manufacturing of weapons. The American Civil War helped bring together advances in nursing and anesthesia that would save millions of lives. In many ways, the information-based world we live in today was shaped by transistor-related advancements during the Second World War. War is the most effective historical force, bringing potentially significant developments along with its obvious horrors.
The war between Russia and Ukraine has the potential to mimic the impact of these earlier wars. Europe is at a crossroads after several years of decline due to populist movements and debate over the EU. The war with Russia may finally push the rest of the continent towards energy independence. It may also strengthen Europe’s resolve and unity, giving it a new position in the fight against autocracy throughout the world. NATO may gain new members after years of skeptics wondering if the organization had any purpose in the 21st century. In the United States, the war has the potential to end a years-long affinity between Russia and the American conservative movement.
These predictions are not based on terrifying fears about what Russia may do. They are rooted in events that have already happened. The Nord Stream II pipeline has already been frozen. Donald Trump has already started to criticize Vladimir Putin. The Europeans are already starting to act in a more harmonized manner. It is possible to see a way forward that is hopeful and breaks the countries of Europe and the West out of their previous complacency, and one that fits earlier historical patterns.
The West will be pushed to intervene in this conflict. They will have to sit on their hands and watch as Ukraine either ekes out a victory or collapses in defeat against the Russian onslaught. Then, they have to prepare for what will come next. More than likely, the experience of war will supercharge trends and movements that had already been operating at a glacial pace. Whatever the outcome, it is certain that the Ukrainian conflict will change Europe for the 21st century and perhaps beyond.
Color me one of those optimists. I thought that the US was signalling “we know what you’re up to and we are ready for it, we are all ready for it” I thought Putin would find some offramp that let him declare victory and go home.
That didn’t happen. He may escalate again, or a few more times. They can do a massive amount of damage if they think it might help them. Many Russians see Ukrainians as hicks and contemptible. That’s not going to make this easier.Report
The weird part is Putin and his crew clearly believed their own rhetoric/propaganda. They expected to be welcomed as liberators. The people would love to have the (jewish) Na.zis thrown out.Report
Considering the relative collective shrug after Crimea I am not surprised.Report
My guess is that even very nationalistic Ukranians understood Crimea as an indefensible periphery with a Russian population, only under Ukrainian control as an accident of Soviet bureaucracy. Huge difference between letting that go and having your capital occupied and presumably your government replaced.Report
All of that is probably true, but I also think its looking in the wrong direction. There are many ways a fully ethnically Russian enclave could have been handed back to Russia. So far as I recall, Russia didn’t pursue any of the. And other then Ukraine cutting off Crimea’s water supply, there was a collective wink from the world.Report
Well yes, if you ask there’s a chance you might get no for an answer. Russia took the approach they did because they already decided they would never accept that.
Russia and Putin are of course responsible for their own actions but I do think the degree of Ukranian resistance we are seeing to this invasion is a major factor in the response. If the government had fled and military laid down its arms at the first sight of the Russian army I do not think the international reaction would be remotely what it has been. Probably a little more than the shrug it gave over Crimea but not a lot. It’s hard to care about a country that won’t fight for itself but extremely easy to sympathize with one that does.Report
For perspective: Ethnically Crimea is 65% Russian and 15% Ukrainian.Report
So you let the Crimeans have a referendum and if they want to leave they leave. Wouldn’t be the first time a country split itself.Report
All those routes risks giving Putin a “no” answer. His snatching of Crimea was indefensible but the collective shrug after he did it was quite understandable.Report
Do you think we will (are?) look back on Crimea as another failed attempt at appeasement?Report
The neocons will but fish em. As for the rest of us, I doubt it. Crimea was just a muddle. Putin grabbed it because he unexpected lost his client government in Ukraine. Ukraine couldn’t hold it because they’d just had a revolution and everything happened so quickly that everyone else was just left blinking over the matter. Crimea’s ethnic make up and history made it very hard to gin up an international scandal over how the whole thing ended up.Report
It’s hard not to be inspired by the valor and resiliency of the Ukrainians. But the reports of the Russian “failures” in this invasion is wishful thinking thinking at best, and straight up propaganda at worst.
I fear the calculus has changed even more with Putin demonstrating he is willing to attack the largest nuclear plant in Europe. He’s already on to the next conflict sending that message to the EU and the US.
I see no off ramp at this point.Report
Sadly I agree with you. While it is good that Russia has slowed its advance into Kyiv, they are mostly doing so to firm up the supply lines and depots they need for sustained conflict. The effectiveness of their movements out of Crimea indicates they are willing to fight a multiple front battle, and the composition of their soldiers as conscripts suggests the real pros – who are far more accurate and deadly – are yet to be deployed. No doubt they’d like to have their flag over Kyiv by now, but they clearly aren’t backing down.
Which means we have to hope that the Ukrainian resistance does enough damage to bog them while the sanctions work, so that the oligarchs go into rebellion. That and the swelling internal protests he’s facing might, might be his undoing.
I don’t expect him to go quietly however.Report
I hope you’re right, but I think an oligarch revolt is a pipe dream.
As long as Putin has China’s support, international sanctions will not deter him.Report
Agree on china, which is why sanctions have been targeted at the oligarchs. They are being cut off from their overseas assets, and given the work they had to do to accumulate those assets its not going to go over well long term. And Putin’s agreements with China will not shield them from the impacts.Report
But the reports of the Russian “failures” in this invasion is wishful thinking thinking at best, and straight up propaganda at worst.
Any details of breaking news in peace time is as likely as not to be disproved within 48 hours. In war time, even general themes might be incorrect, or if correct, turned on their heads as events unfold. It’s not necessarily deception (self- or otherwise), it’s just the fog of war.Report
We (the West and our media) are firmly (and justly) on the Ukrainian side of the conflict and eager to interpret news as “positive” because we very much don’t like the alternative. It’s human nature to do so.
Confirmation bias is always prevalent and often moreso in the fog of war. We’ll continue to see this tone of reporting until Kiev falls and reality slaps us sober.Report
May be the case. I’ve been avoiding the kind of day-to-day news that’s prone to those flaws.Report
Kyiv.
Unless you are a Russian PartisanReport
I just learned that distinction recently. (Keeeeeve, one syllable).
I still say San Diego Chargers, so there will be an adjustment period.Report
I wish I could disagree. The war is only a week old. Just because it isn’t the cakewalk that Putin (channelling Bush the lesser) predicted doesn’t mean that Russia will lose it.
That being said Russia has already lost the overarching conflict. The Russian military’s reputation for effectiveness and Putin’s reputation for savvy are both wrecked. Geopolitically and economically it’s been an unmitigated fiasco for Russia.Report
The Ukranian’s short term but apparent significant exceeding of expectations is likely to lead to long term misery for the people. At the same time I think it’s hard to imagine Putin being able to hold the country much better than we held Afghanistan. If any government they prop up can’t withstand the withdraw of foreign troops it will become a perpetual suck of resources Russia is a lot less equipped to deal with than we were in our own misadventures.
The big question is how all of that plays out in Russian domestic politics over the long haul. Maybe the people who matter don’t care or see it as a price worth paying. Maybe they don’t or their patience will run out. My guess is we probably won’t ever know in the moment.Report
Nato openly supplying weapons right on the other side of the border is a big deal. The population being relatively united against him is also.
This could easily go worse for him than it did for us.Report
Possibly, but Ukraine is mostly flat. Mountains are a lot better for insurgents. OTOH Ukrainians are almost the same as Russians racially/culturally speaking so it’s an open question if the Russians would be as sanguine on an emotional level about Ukrainian suffering and death as they (and we) were/are with arab/muslim suffering and death.Report
There’s also just a sheer numbers problem. The full invasion of Iraq involved about 250k soldiers including the US and all other contributors. I believe for the hottest years of the occupation that number was about 130k. Even at the time experts said that was far too few for the mission.
Russia has gone into a geographically bigger country with a comparable population and no friends to help. To your point they do have a cultural and geographic proximity advantages we did not. However with those numbers the Russians won’t be able to control the country if the Ukranians won’t let them, even if the big cities eventually fall. It then becomes a question of how brutal the Russians are willing to be. I would think the answer is much more than we were but even that might not guarantee success.Report
Iraq was not getting, well, Europe shipping it modern arms designed to defeat armored vehicles, tanks, jets and helicopters.
As well as enough rifles, food, and ammunition to finish outfitting every man in Ukraine that’s been trained to hold a weapon. Which is pretty much all of them, because Ukraine has mandatory military service.
Add that to the advantages of a defender versus an attacker or occupier, and you have a very ugly situation.
Furthermore, brutality will not help Putin pacify the area — it will just create more partisans to fight him, in a country more awash with military weapons than the NRA’s wet dream.Report
You touch on the point about that makes me sick to my stomach.
The West is helping Ukraine enough to keep them on life support, but not enough to actually cure them. The Ukrainians are literally pawns in this global chess match.
The more damage they do, the longer they do it, the better for us.
Not so much them.
How nice of us to help them sacrifice themselves for Europe’s benefit. This is a tragedy in slow motion.Report
I prefer to assign agency to the Ukrainians instead of calling them pawns. They wish to resist, they desire that aid, they could stop at any time.Report
Oh, I don’t deny them their agency. It’s what is enabling the irony.
I meant pawns in terms of how the West is playing the chess game out. Ukraine’s well being is immaterial to the service they are providing the rest of the pieces of the European chess board.Report
Poland and the Ukraine share a border and there are streams of refugees coming in. My in-laws in Poland are welcoming them.
I think you are giving everyone a level of cynicism that is undeserved.
We are not willing to create a no-fly zone, i.e. shoot down Russian aircraft and actively go to war with Russia. That is not the same as “not caring”.Report
I didn’t say we didn’t care. We do. Very much.
But not enough to start a World War over.
I don’t disagree with the lines the West has drawn. My point is that the ethical dilemma (let some die to prevent more from dying) makes me ill.Report
I seem to remember a lieutenant governor of Texas saying something similar at the beginning of the pandemic. That made me ill too.
Unfortunately Putin operates from just that basis apparently. In that he doesn’t mind sacrificing some Russians to secure what e sees as the long term future of Russia.Report
That was the case when they gave up their nukes after becoming independent in the mid 1990’s. It was the case when they signed the Minsk Agreement a few years ago. That part of the equation hasn’t changed.
Putin’s approach hasn’t changed easier. He’s daring the west to do something and until he invaded we didn’t.Report
I guess it depends on the long or short view of the Ukranians. On the one hand these may be the first days of a real, much more coherent Ukranian nation. They may look back on this decades hence as when they ‘got free.’ At the same time, if that happens which is still very much a hypothetical, it will be very cold comfort for the huge numbers of innocents suffering and dying for however long it takes to get to the other side, if they ever do.
That is the ultimate irony of what Putin is doing. No one ever seems to successfully build a nation from the top down but plenty of nations have found or invented themselves out of solidarity against a common enemy. Plenty have also of course ceased to exist.Report
In 1987 I was studying in Europe for a semester and went to East Berlin. At that time, passing through Checkpoint Charlie, the Evil Empire seemed impregnable and eternal, with an iron fisted grip on the East Bloc countries.
No one, and I mean even no one, not even in the CIA or KGB, had any inkling that it was all about to just collapse without a shot being fired.
Point being that sometimes nations change like bankruptcy, bit by bit then all at once.
What will be the outcome of this war? I don’t think anyone can even guess at this point.Report