The Guardian’s Eight Tips For Defeating Putin Are Misguided
Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter
Continuing to falsely conflate Europe’s interests with Ukraine’s will only accelerate its growing irrelevance as the US exploits its misguided priorities to institutionalize the EU’s vassalage as a captive arms, energy, and export market.
The Guardian’s Timothy Garton Ash published an article in late May about “how to defeat Vladimir Putin”. The lede claimed that “The Russian dictator’s dreams of greatness threaten Nato and the EU, not just Ukraine.
Garton Ash then advised that there are eight ways in which Vladimir Putin can be thwarted”: “What democracies in Europe and beyond can do is hone a strategy to defeat his external ambitions.” He then detailed eight policies for them to apply, which will now be briefly critiqued:
1. Have A Clear Purpose | Garton Ash believes that the West must prevent Putin from “subjugating Ukraine, restoring as much as possible of the Russian empire, destroying the credibility of Nato, undermining the European Union and re-establishing a Russian sphere of influence over eastern Europe.” Putin’s goal has always been to neutralize Ukrainian-emanating threats from NATO in order to then reform the European security architecture after diplomacy failed to achieve this, however, so Garton Ash’s “clear purpose” is irrelevant.
2. Stay The Course With Ukraine | Garton Ash advises that the West continue its existing support for Ukraine even after the conflict ends in order to prevent it from becoming “a depopulated, internally conflicted, dysfunctional state.” The problem with this proposal is that it would entail over half a trillion dollars if the estimated physical reconstruction costs are borne by Ukraine’s patrons and even if more if they continue funding its armed forces and administration. Taxpayers across the West might not agree to foot such a tremendous bill.
3. Increase Economic Pressure On Russia | Apart from “tightening sanctions and supporting Ukraine’s long-range strikes on Russian energy infrastructure”, Garton Ash calls for “cracking down harder on Russia’s shadow fleet.” For as appealing as that might sound to many hawks, there’s little left that the West could sanction, Russia’s further reduced energy production could spike global prices at Western consumers’ expense, and seizing naval-escorted “shadow fleet” vessels risks a hot NATO-Russian war. Western policymakers might thus reject his advice.