I have a bad feeling that all those warnings about not giving governments excessive powers in the name of fighting terrorism, for fear of how those powers would be used by a government of bad guys, are all about to be proven true.
Yes, of course, but it doesn't even have to be a government of bad guys.
The modern state is so powerful and omnipresent that, if given unnecessary or excessive power and unwatched, governments of the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent can do plenty of damage without a shred of malice.
The state is like fire - a powerful servant. A terrible master.
Consider the combination of “the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent” and a pinch of malice - it didn’t take much to turn ICE into Trumps stormtrooper division.
I have a bad feeling that all those warnings about not giving governments excessive powers in the name of fighting terrorism, for fear of how those powers would be used by a government of bad guys, are all about to be proven true.
Yes, of course, but it doesn't even have to be a government of bad guys.
The modern state is so powerful and omnipresent that, if given unnecessary or excessive power and unwatched, governments of the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent can do plenty of damage without a shred of malice.
The state is like fire - a powerful servant. A terrible master.
Consider the combination of “the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent” and a pinch of malice - it didn’t take much to turn ICE into Trumps stormtrooper division.
The Stanford Prison Experiment does spring to mind. Or the electrocution one... Milgram, I think.
I have a bad feeling that all those warnings about not giving governments excessive powers in the name of fighting terrorism, for fear of how those powers would be used by a government of bad guys, are all about to be proven true.
Yes, of course, but it doesn't even have to be a government of bad guys.
The modern state is so powerful and omnipresent that, if given unnecessary or excessive power and unwatched, governments of the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent can do plenty of damage without a shred of malice.
The state is like fire - a powerful servant. A terrible master.
Consider the combination of “the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent” and a pinch of malice - it didn’t take much to turn ICE into Trumps stormtrooper division.
The Stanford Prison Experiment does spring to mind. Or the electrocution one... Milgram, I think.
I think both experiments are considered problematic, today.
But the general principle is fairly sound - can’t recall a government, anywhere, that had significant problems getting staff as they “boiled the frog”
The Gestapo was largely based on the Prussian Political Police - which before the Nazis came into power, was fairly effective in *going after the Nazis*. The German Political Police were supposed to deal with extremist organisations…
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
Does it?
You know, Specsavers do hearing aids as well…
Key economic sectors weakening, a slowdown in investment, calls for a VAT rise that would necessarily increase inflation temporarily. The only difference is the Russian papers aren't blaming Rachel Reeves.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
I have no idea whether these stories are correct or not but if even half of your last two years of output had been accurate Russia would have surrendered or even ceased to exist as a viable country at least a year ago. I don't know where you get your information but Steve Rosenburg seems to be one of the BBC's most reliable and his reports appear to show a more nuanced picture.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
Does it?
You know, Specsavers do hearing aids as well…
Key economic sectors weakening, a slowdown in investment, calls for a VAT rise that would necessarily increase inflation temporarily. The only difference is the Russian papers aren't blaming Rachel Reeves.
I don't think any other major European economy has seen manufacturing output drop by double digit percentages, but if you have the figures I'm willing to be corrected.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
I have no idea whether these stories are correct or not but if even half of your last two years of output had been accurate Russia would have surrendered or even ceased to exist as a viable country at least a year ago. I don't know where you get your information but Steve Rosenburg seems to be one of the BBC's most reliable and his reports appear to show a more nuanced picture.
I would point out that Russia went through much worse than that in the Civil War - Nove put manufacturing decline down as a staggering 87% from 1914 to 1921 - but it came through. With difficulty, but it did.
That's not to say Sandpit's figures are accurate although given other data they are possible. Just that it's easy to underestimate how much punishment a major economy can take before implosion.
I have a bad feeling that all those warnings about not giving governments excessive powers in the name of fighting terrorism, for fear of how those powers would be used by a government of bad guys, are all about to be proven true.
Yes, of course, but it doesn't even have to be a government of bad guys.
The modern state is so powerful and omnipresent that, if given unnecessary or excessive power and unwatched, governments of the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent can do plenty of damage without a shred of malice.
The state is like fire - a powerful servant. A terrible master.
Consider the combination of “the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent” and a pinch of malice - it didn’t take much to turn ICE into Trumps stormtrooper division.
The Stanford Prison Experiment does spring to mind. Or the electrocution one... Milgram, I think.
I think both experiments are considered problematic, today.
But the general principle is fairly sound - can’t recall a government, anywhere, that had significant problems getting staff as they “boiled the frog”
The Gestapo was largely based on the Prussian Political Police - which before the Nazis came into power, was fairly effective in *going after the Nazis*. The German Political Police were supposed to deal with extremist organisations…
Most war criminals/criminals against humanity are not like Dirlewanger or Beria, albeit war and revolution gives such creatures the chance to come to the fore.
They’re Browning’s “ordinary men”, which is why most fade back easily into civilian life.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
Does it?
You know, Specsavers do hearing aids as well…
Key economic sectors weakening, a slowdown in investment, calls for a VAT rise that would necessarily increase inflation temporarily. The only difference is the Russian papers aren't blaming Rachel Reeves.
Although they'd sooner blame her than Vladimir Putin.
I have a bad feeling that all those warnings about not giving governments excessive powers in the name of fighting terrorism, for fear of how those powers would be used by a government of bad guys, are all about to be proven true.
Yes, of course, but it doesn't even have to be a government of bad guys.
The modern state is so powerful and omnipresent that, if given unnecessary or excessive power and unwatched, governments of the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent can do plenty of damage without a shred of malice.
The state is like fire - a powerful servant. A terrible master.
Consider the combination of “the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent” and a pinch of malice - it didn’t take much to turn ICE into Trumps stormtrooper division.
The reason we don't hear about the Proud Boys, and similar groups so much now is that so many of them joined ICE.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
I have no idea whether these stories are correct or not but if even half of your last two years of output had been accurate Russia would have surrendered or even ceased to exist as a viable country at least a year ago. I don't know where you get your information but Steve Rosenburg seems to be one of the BBC's most reliable and his reports appear to show a more nuanced picture.
I would point out that Russia went through much worse than that in the Civil War - Nove put manufacturing decline down as a staggering 87% from 1914 to 1921 - but it came through. With difficulty, but it did.
That's not to say Sandpit's figures are accurate although given other data they are possible. Just that it's easy to underestimate how much punishment a major economy can take before implosion.
It came through because the US rebuilt its industry. Partly paid for by the export of grain (see also Holodomor).
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
I have no idea whether these stories are correct or not but if even half of your last two years of output had been accurate Russia would have surrendered or even ceased to exist as a viable country at least a year ago. I don't know where you get your information but Steve Rosenburg seems to be one of the BBC's most reliable and his reports appear to show a more nuanced picture.
I would point out that Russia went through much worse than that in the Civil War - Nove put manufacturing decline down as a staggering 87% from 1914 to 1921 - but it came through. With difficulty, but it did.
That's not to say Sandpit's figures are accurate although given other data they are possible. Just that it's easy to underestimate how much punishment a major economy can take before implosion.
The biggie is that they don’t have high government debt, around 20% of GDP, so they’re not constantly in hock to bond markets are most of the West with 100% ratios. Tthey also have significant reserves of gold which the Chinese are eagerly buying up, likely at some way below market price. The Chinese are even buying Russian bonds denominated in Yuan, presumably because they expect roubles to be useful as little more than toilet paper by the time the war concludes.
As you suggest, they’ve been through worse before, and the authorities in Moscow appear to care litttle for the fate of their people outside the major cities.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
You don't tend to see this kind of thing in most European economies.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
Does it?
You know, Specsavers do hearing aids as well…
Key economic sectors weakening, a slowdown in investment, calls for a VAT rise that would necessarily increase inflation temporarily. The only difference is the Russian papers aren't blaming Rachel Reeves.
I don't think any other major European economy has seen manufacturing output drop by double digit percentages, but if you have the figures I'm willing to be corrected.
I was merely comparing headlines with the Russian papers quoted in the previous post, taking the Russian ones and adding our Chancellor's name.
The point is that although the Russian economy is in a bad state, first, there's an element of crying wolf, most importantly Russia itself has been in a far worse state within living memory. Russians queueing for petrol will remember (or their grandparents will) having to queue all day for rotten or non-existent food. The reason Putin remains popular is that he is credited, rightly or wrongly, for sorting out the mess. Russian GDP doubled since 2000. Any drop will be weighed against that.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
And you think conscripts aren’t being sent?
It’s just conscripts from Moscow and St Pete’s that are protected
Do you have a source for conscripts being sent to fight in Ukraine?
Unless I've made an embarrassingly large mistake in listening/reading comprehension (always possible, granted) it would be news to the experts at RUSI and the ISW.
Yes, there's a lot of coercion used to force conscripts to sign contracts, but it means the Russian state can say that conscripts aren't sent to fight.
That is not what that article says. It says conscripts are being forced to fight using forged documentation saying they are contract soldiers, which is altogether different.
He has also been using North Korean ‘volunteers,’ ie conscripts.
There's a difference between individual unit commanders forging documents when coercion doesn't work and a central government policy to send conscripts officially to the war. That difference is important to the acceptability of the war and its casualties to the Russian public.
Also, obviously the Russian people aren't going to care about North Korean casualties. So what if they're conscripts?
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
I have no idea whether these stories are correct or not but if even half of your last two years of output had been accurate Russia would have surrendered or even ceased to exist as a viable country at least a year ago. I don't know where you get your information but Steve Rosenburg seems to be one of the BBC's most reliable and his reports appear to show a more nuanced picture.
I would point out that Russia went through much worse than that in the Civil War - Nove put manufacturing decline down as a staggering 87% from 1914 to 1921 - but it came through. With difficulty, but it did.
That's not to say Sandpit's figures are accurate although given other data they are possible. Just that it's easy to underestimate how much punishment a major economy can take before implosion.
Rosstat are fiddling the figures, but incompetently. So they publish figures showing overall output in the industrial sector is down by 0.1%. But they also publish figures showing production of every individual component down by double figures - pipes down by 30%, cars down by 25%, sulphur down by 35%, etc, etc.
Sulphur is an interesting one. Plants producing sulfur have been a target of the Ukrainians and it's important in making explosives.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
I have no idea whether these stories are correct or not but if even half of your last two years of output had been accurate Russia would have surrendered or even ceased to exist as a viable country at least a year ago. I don't know where you get your information but Steve Rosenburg seems to be one of the BBC's most reliable and his reports appear to show a more nuanced picture.
I would point out that Russia went through much worse than that in the Civil War - Nove put manufacturing decline down as a staggering 87% from 1914 to 1921 - but it came through. With difficulty, but it did.
That's not to say Sandpit's figures are accurate although given other data they are possible. Just that it's easy to underestimate how much punishment a major economy can take before implosion.
The biggie is that they don’t have high government debt, around 20% of GDP, so they’re not constantly in hock to bond markets are most of the West with 100% ratios. Tthey also have significant reserves of gold which the Chinese are eagerly buying up, likely at some way below market price. The Chinese are even buying Russian bonds denominated in Yuan, presumably because they expect roubles to be useful as little more than toilet paper by the time the war concludes.
As you suggest, they’ve been through worse before, and the authorities in Moscow appear to care litttle for the fate of their people outside the major cities.
I'm all for keeping the morale of the troops up and it's understandable that PBs finest are rooting for Ukraine but since Trump arrived it's becoming impossible in nearly all areas political to separate fact from fiction which is why we are looking down the barrel at a possible Farage Prime Ministership. All I ask is that PB bucks the trend and at least tries to give a rounded picture. Here's a lesson from an unusual source....
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
I have no idea whether these stories are correct or not but if even half of your last two years of output had been accurate Russia would have surrendered or even ceased to exist as a viable country at least a year ago. I don't know where you get your information but Steve Rosenburg seems to be one of the BBC's most reliable and his reports appear to show a more nuanced picture.
I would point out that Russia went through much worse than that in the Civil War - Nove put manufacturing decline down as a staggering 87% from 1914 to 1921 - but it came through. With difficulty, but it did.
That's not to say Sandpit's figures are accurate although given other data they are possible. Just that it's easy to underestimate how much punishment a major economy can take before implosion.
Rosstat are fiddling the figures, but incompetently. So they publish figures showing overall output in the industrial sector is down by 0.1%. But they also publish figures showing production of every individual component down by double figures - pipes down by 30%, cars down by 25%, sulfur down by 35%, etc, etc.
Sulfur is an interesting one. Plants producing sulfur have been a target of the Ukrainians and it's important in making explosives.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
I have no idea whether these stories are correct or not but if even half of your last two years of output had been accurate Russia would have surrendered or even ceased to exist as a viable country at least a year ago. I don't know where you get your information but Steve Rosenburg seems to be one of the BBC's most reliable and his reports appear to show a more nuanced picture.
I would point out that Russia went through much worse than that in the Civil War - Nove put manufacturing decline down as a staggering 87% from 1914 to 1921 - but it came through. With difficulty, but it did.
That's not to say Sandpit's figures are accurate although given other data they are possible. Just that it's easy to underestimate how much punishment a major economy can take before implosion.
Rosstat are fiddling the figures, but incompetently. So they publish figures showing overall output in the industrial sector is down by 0.1%. But they also publish figures showing production of every individual component down by double figures - pipes down by 30%, cars down by 25%, sulfur down by 35%, etc, etc.
Sulfur is an interesting one. Plants producing sulfur have been a target of the Ukrainians and it's important in making explosives.
Sulphur*
Yeah, sorry about that. The AI translation of the main source I follow for Russian economic news uses sulfur, and I'm an instinctive mimic.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
I have no idea whether these stories are correct or not but if even half of your last two years of output had been accurate Russia would have surrendered or even ceased to exist as a viable country at least a year ago. I don't know where you get your information but Steve Rosenburg seems to be one of the BBC's most reliable and his reports appear to show a more nuanced picture.
I would point out that Russia went through much worse than that in the Civil War - Nove put manufacturing decline down as a staggering 87% from 1914 to 1921 - but it came through. With difficulty, but it did.
That's not to say Sandpit's figures are accurate although given other data they are possible. Just that it's easy to underestimate how much punishment a major economy can take before implosion.
The biggie is that they don’t have high government debt, around 20% of GDP, so they’re not constantly in hock to bond markets are most of the West with 100% ratios. Tthey also have significant reserves of gold which the Chinese are eagerly buying up, likely at some way below market price. The Chinese are even buying Russian bonds denominated in Yuan, presumably because they expect roubles to be useful as little more than toilet paper by the time the war concludes.
As you suggest, they’ve been through worse before, and the authorities in Moscow appear to care litttle for the fate of their people outside the major cities.
I'm all for keeping the morale of the troops up and it's understandable that PBs finest are rooting for Ukraine but since Trump arrived it's becoming impossible in nearly all areas political to separate fact from fiction which is why we are looking down the barrel at a possible Farage Prime Ministership. All I ask is that PB bucks the trend and at least tries to give a rounded picture. Here's a lesson from an unusual source....
Don’t worry, I’m well aware that getting most of your news on a war from one side is a bad way to get an idea of what’s really going on, which is why I’m sticking to what the Russians themselves are reporting officially.
Their official statisticians and central bankers should be keeping away from tall buildings and cooking their own dinners.
It’s clearly a lot worse underneath the surface though, but China is still propping them up with cash and it might take a while until that runs out. Xi likely has his long-term eyes on economically taking over most of Russia East of the Urals.
Bear in mind, of course, that the invasion is usually the easy part. Russia will have a long and expensive issue ruling over a bunch of people who would rather be part of the country next door. And occupation is usually economically ruinous.
There are brave prime continuing to resist Russia's occupation in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, but the evidence that emerged from Kherson after its liberation was that the Russians were prepared to do what was necessary to occupy a hostile country, and they're much better at that bloody business than the war-fighting end of things.
I think that the collective Western strategy means that continuing the war is a free hit for Putin. He does not have to fear overextending and pushing Russia past the point of endurance, because he knows Ukraine will be forced to accept a ceasefire whenever he feels the need to offer one.
Our actions and choices are therefore prolonging the war because we are minimising the risk of Russian defeat. Somehow we have to change the calculus. We need a change of strategy.
I don't disagree that a change of strategy is needed - frankly European leaders need to grow a pair - but I disagree re Putin.
He can't accept the current cease fire lines, because 1.1 million dead or invalided out for about 15% of the Ukraine, with the rest of Ukraine now clearly in the Western orbit, and essentially zero chance of a friendly Ukrainian government in the future means the end of Putin.
Putin needs a decisive victory. And he's been told that one is imminent.
I disagree. Saddam survived his disastrous escapade in Kuwait, and that was more clearly an embarrassing defeat than the status quo would represent for Putin. And if Russians were going to care about the 1.1 million casualties then Putin would already be toppled - but they don't because they've accepted that as being well-recompensed volunteers.
Remember it was only around 10,000 dead in the Afghanistan war that caused much more trouble for the USSR, but that had more impact because they were conscripts.
It's hard to tell how much this kind of stuff means. Another data point.
I happen to read lots of small Russian press on a daily basis, the local kind that usually talks about burst pipes and rarely makes it to Twitter. I find that the picture this kind of press paints often gives one a much better sense of how things really stand.
Beyond Moscow and St. Petersburg, beyond the carefully crafted image of the enduring Russian who can quietly take any pain indefinitely, beyond the pompous headlines about the newest Ukrainian city they've been able to obliterate, the very fabric of Russian society is about to come apart.. https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2004459660951105749
Similarly from Steve Rosenberg.
Today’s Russian papers sounding downbeat about the economy. “It may slide into stagnation...key sectors weakening.” Another paper: “Slowdown in investment & falling production in civilian industries.” VAT rise may spark “temporary acceleration in inflation.” .. https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/2003151181347192935
Sounds like most European economies to be honest..😚🧐
There’s a lot of European countries not doing too well at the moment, but nothing like what’s happening in Russia.
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
I have no idea whether these stories are correct or not but if even half of your last two years of output had been accurate Russia would have surrendered or even ceased to exist as a viable country at least a year ago. I don't know where you get your information but Steve Rosenburg seems to be one of the BBC's most reliable and his reports appear to show a more nuanced picture.
I would point out that Russia went through much worse than that in the Civil War - Nove put manufacturing decline down as a staggering 87% from 1914 to 1921 - but it came through. With difficulty, but it did.
That's not to say Sandpit's figures are accurate although given other data they are possible. Just that it's easy to underestimate how much punishment a major economy can take before implosion.
Rosstat are fiddling the figures, but incompetently. So they publish figures showing overall output in the industrial sector is down by 0.1%. But they also publish figures showing production of every individual component down by double figures - pipes down by 30%, cars down by 25%, sulfur down by 35%, etc, etc.
Sulfur is an interesting one. Plants producing sulfur have been a target of the Ukrainians and it's important in making explosives.
Sulphur*
Yeah, sorry about that. The AI translation of the main source I follow for Russian economic news uses sulfur, and I'm an instinctive mimic.
Edit: corrected now!
Yeah, I get that sometimes. Daft Yankee Doodle spellings.
Comments
The state is like fire - a powerful servant. A terrible master.
Consider the combination of “the incompetent, sloppy, arrogant, careless and complacent” and a pinch of malice - it didn’t take much to turn ICE into Trumps stormtrooper division.
But the general principle is fairly sound - can’t recall a government, anywhere, that had significant problems getting staff as they “boiled the frog”
The Gestapo was largely based on the Prussian Political Police - which before the Nazis came into power, was fairly effective in *going after the Nazis*. The German Political Police were supposed to deal with extremist organisations…
After the Nazis took over, they found little trouble in getting the same people to go after their opponents. Including https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Müller_(Gestapo)
You know, Specsavers do hearing aids as well…
Who knew?
(Will all Tory members who voted for her to be their leader form an orderly queue)
There’s factories moving to 4-day and 3-day weeks, even weapons factories, interest rates around 20% have totally killed investment, many thousands of entrepreneurs have sold up and left the country, some regions are so close to bankruptcy that they’ve stopped paying army recruitment bonuses, oil and gas production is down more than 30% and is being sold below cost to maintain cashflow, much of the country has to queue for petrol.
This is all the stuff we know about officially, that has appeared in Russian media, the real situation underneath is likely to be a whole lot worse.
Meanwhile, they talk about wanting peace but spent the night bombing mostly civilian targets in Kyiv.
That's not to say Sandpit's figures are accurate although given other data they are possible. Just that it's easy to underestimate how much punishment a major economy can take before implosion.
They’re Browning’s “ordinary men”, which is why most fade back easily into civilian life.
Partly paid for by the export of grain (see also Holodomor).
As you suggest, they’ve been through worse before, and the authorities in Moscow appear to care litttle for the fate of their people outside the major cities.
https://united24media.com/latest-news/russias-war-economy-falters-as-civilian-industries-slide-into-deep-decline-14561 some numbers on the 2025 industrial decline. Here’s to more of the same in ‘26.
Just for Roger, here’s a French newspaper source https://www.lemonde.fr/en/economy/article/2025/08/11/why-russia-s-economy-is-beginning-to-falter_6744266_19.html
Russian Defence Factory Boss Sets Himself on Fire on Red Square Amid Production Pressures
Vladimir Arsenyev, 75, head of Moscow’s Volna Central Scientific Research Institute, poured gasoline over himself and set himself alight on Red Square in July 2024, near the Kremlin and Lenin’s mausoleum.
https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2025/12/23/russian-defence-factory-boss-sets-himself-on-fire-on-red-square-amid-production-pressures/
https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/2004603692197036322
https://x.com/davidlammy/status/2004642399230779485
https://x.com/yvettecoopermp/status/2004625697990746201
He appears to have a history of wishing death to people, especially Jews.
The point is that although the Russian economy is in a bad state, first, there's an element of crying wolf, most importantly Russia itself has been in a far worse state within living memory. Russians queueing for petrol will remember (or their grandparents will) having to queue all day for rotten or non-existent food. The reason Putin remains popular is that he is credited, rightly or wrongly, for sorting out the mess. Russian GDP doubled since 2000. Any drop will be weighed against that.
Also, obviously the Russian people aren't going to care about North Korean casualties. So what if they're conscripts?
Sulphur is an interesting one. Plants producing sulfur have been a target of the Ukrainians and it's important in making explosives.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=guardian+points+of+view+advert#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:5e550280,vid:_SsccRkLLzU,st:0
NEW THREAD
Edit: corrected now!
Their official statisticians and central bankers should be keeping away from tall buildings and cooking their own dinners.
It’s clearly a lot worse underneath the surface though, but China is still propping them up with cash and it might take a while until that runs out. Xi likely has his long-term eyes on economically taking over most of Russia East of the Urals.