Columns An attack on Ukraine would be great madness

Harvard Gazette recently interviewed Alexandra Vacroux, director of Harvard’s Department of Russian Studies. Going through the components of the crisis in Ukraine, Vacroux admitted: “There is something in President Vladimir Putin’s calculations that we do not know because what we know does not make sense.”

Other experts say the same: there would be no point in attacking Ukraine.

The attack itself would probably be fairly easy, but after that, Russia would run into the same problem as the United States in its recent wars: What then?

The destruction of enemy positions and troops is quick, but then what to do? Occupying is difficult, expensive and costs blood. Western economic sanctions would stifle the Russian economy.

It is difficult for anyone other than Vacroux to come up with a formula to make this a plus. It is easier to come to equations where war would lead to a similar bankruptcy in Russia as in the 1980s.

Dead end trying out with the help of psychology. Tyler Cowen, a professor of economics at George Mason University, said in his Bloomberg blog that Putin’s actions cannot be influenced by rational reasoning because Putin is not a Homo economicus but an aspiring dictator.

“Economists typically define rationality as the effective use of means to achieve goals — for example, by spending money to get the most out of it. It fits well for some purposes, but goes wrong when trying to understand leaders like Putin who are obsessed with power. ”

This aspect does not seem to be understood by Western leaders. Worst of all in the yard was U.S. superrational president Barack Obama, who mocked Russia as a fading second-class state. Putin was better understood by Donald Trump, who himself is experiencing the same kind of uncertainty that has turned into a desire for power as the Russian president.

Sauli Niinistö, who has even won the title of “Putin Whisperer” in the world, may have enlightened his Western colleagues about Putin’s psyche. In this context, the whisperer does not necessarily mean a counselor but an animal therapist like Tom Booker’s character in the film Horse whisperer.

In interviews, Niinistö has said that Putin appreciates the Finns, because Putin received respectful treatment in Turku as the deputy mayor of St. Petersburg. When others did not appreciate, even the people of Turku appreciated.

Putin for self-esteem there has been a manna situation where the world has wondered what Putin is going to do. The main hood of the dictator is like a black box trying to peek inside.

Such an analysis of dictators is terribly exciting for those living in democratic countries, as no one in them has the same power as Putin in Russia. Putin may arrange poison for his opponent’s panties, but British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is threatened with departure because he drank wine with his aides.

However, concentrating on one man is a simplification, because not all of Russia’s actions depend on Putin’s whims – we just don’t know which actions. So it is actually a black box inside a black box.

Analyzing the mind movements of the dictator also easily leads to unnecessary mystification. No matter how long a person sits at a table, it doesn’t make him a bigger person.

When we don’t see Putin in the head, we don’t know if war is a real option or if the whole operation was an attempt to test and blackmail the West, i.e. a big bluff. The game is still in progress, and I guess it won’t end right away, but right now Putin doesn’t seem to be doing very well.

The front of the West has not been scattered and Russia’s demands have not been accepted. The US leadership has strengthened. NATO forces in Eastern Europe have not been reduced but increased. Ukrainians have been deported further and further from Russia. Even a reliable neighboring country, Finland, has been pushed towards NATO.

If this is a success, what would failure look like?

The author is the forerunner of the editorial office.