This means that …
Unlike military or political alliances from other times and places, the members of this group don’t operate like a bloc, but rather like an
agglomeration of companies — call it Autocracy Inc. Their links are cemented not by ideals but by deals — deals designed to take the edge off Western economic boycotts, or to make them personally rich — which is why they can operate across geographical and historical lines.8
There is effectively a new world order, to which Applebaum has been quoted as saying, ‘western and America responses have been profoundly inadequate.’
In speaking directly to the situation in the Ukraine, Applebaum suggests how the West might respond. It is a three-pronged approach: Applebaum suggests the West must engage in a process of ‘reinforcing our allies, reinforcing other democracies, being prepared for this kind of event, not treating it as if out of left field or unimaginable circumstance.’ She also argues we ‘need to put a much bigger emphasis’ on talking with the autocratic world, including talking to Russia and China. And finally, she contends the West must ‘end the ways in which our financial institutions support kleptocracy,’ rethink how ‘our trade with Russia or China or how it hides Russian money,’ and ‘end those practices inside our own societies.’99
All are sensible suggestions; and, in fact, most of these suggestions have already been adopted by the West in response to the Russian invasion of the Ukraine: the West generally and NATO specifically have not only presented a collective front in condemning the Russian invasion (inviting Finland and Sweden to join NATO) but both have also provided arms to Ukraine, bolstering their defenses; the West has not only kept lines open with Russia and China, but engaged in new communication
strategies in the time preceding and after the
invasion that used transparency in a public relations campaign designed to gain the upper hand ethically; and the West not only imposed stages of sanctions against key members of Russian society, but instituted – as did some financial institutions themselves – new restrictions on financial institutions to hamper the sheltering and laundering of funds.
So, the question must be asked: given this understanding of authoritarianism and authoritarian personalities, have such well-intentioned suggestions and actions actually achieved the desired goals first of stopping the initial invasion and second of causing a retreat to pre-invasion boundaries? The answer has to be no. The invasion continues, even intensifies, despite the Russian forces suffering heavy losses.
Speculation abounds as to why all continues: some argue Putin overestimated the weakness of the United States after Trump and COVID and underestimated the continued solidarity and resilience of the West;10 others argue Putin had either incorporated such losses into his long-range planning or simply didn’t care; yet others argue Putin is ill, that he is paranoid, and/or that he wants to solidify his legacy by reconstituting the former Soviet Union; still others argue he doesn’t have an offramp to save face.
All seem reasonable, but none ring true. Miscalculating
Unlike military or political alliances from other times and places, the members of this group don’t operate like a bloc, but rather like an agglomeration of companies — call it Autocracy Inc.
10