Tag: Trade and investment

Things will be worse for Russians

In my piece last week on how bad things could get, I gave short shrift to the situation inside Russia. I noted only that Putin is using his war against Ukraine as an opportunity to complete Moscow’s transition to autocracy. But there will be other consequences, especially on the economy. Branko Milanovic takes a look at these in two well-crafted posts, one on the short-term and one on the long-term. I recommend reading him, but I’ll offer here a layman’s account of what I think he says.

The short term is bad

Branko uses past economic crises in Russia, especially in the 1990s, to come to a rough guess at how sanctions might affect growth:

One can thus, very roughly, put the expected decline in 2022-23 at high single digits, or low double digits: it is not going to be as sharp as in 1992, nor as (relatively) mild as in 1998.

He also guesstimates that unemployment could go back up to 7-8%, with inflation rising sharply due to the ruble’s fall. That’s pretty bad, especially for lower incomes. He judges government policy responses so far “very weak,” because there are no good choices to be made.

Bottom line:

The coming years of Putin’s rule will thus look very much like the worst years of Yeltsin’s rule. 

https://braveneweurope.com/branko-milanovic-russias-economic-prospects-the-short-term
The long term is worse

Next Branko looks at the long term, assuming that sanctions will remain in place for decades, because that is what American sanctions generally do. He identifies two possible strategies for Russia: import substitution and a pivot to Asia. But Russia lacks the industrial base and growing labor supply required for import substitution as well as the infrastructure and investment funds required for a pivot to Asia.

Bottom line:

…the future of the Eurasian continent looks very much like its past: the maritime areas along the Atlantic and the Pacific coasts will be fairly rich, much better-off than the significant large continental areas in the middle. Th[is] opens up the question of how politically viable will be such an uneven distribution of economic activity: will migrations, or political reconfigurations “solve” such disequilibria?

https://braveneweurope.com/branko-milanovic-long-term-difficulties-of-import-substitution-and-delocalization
It’s not just the economy

Let me add a few words about the broader social implications of this dire scenario. Putin isn’t going to allow freedom of expression if most of it will be criticism of him. So he has already taken charge of virtually all the media and made criticism of the war in Ukraine (even calling it a war) illegal. Domestic oppression is the necessary counterpart to a war that most Russians did not expect and don’t want.

In addition, Western sanctions will create money-making opportunities for evading them. The miscreants will often be people involved in the country’s secret services and the managers of state-controlled businesses. Putin has surrounded himself with former colleagues from the KGB, the security service where he started his career. His chosen oligarchs are already strong.

The West will try to damage the interests of the KGBers and oligarchs with personal sanctions on their finances, foreign property, and travel. But the smartest and luckiest of them will wriggle free. A society already plagued with organized crime will find itself firmly in the grip of whoever can help Putin evade Western sanctions.

The West is not immune

A Russian Mafia state does nothing to help the cause of democracy and freedom. You can hope Russians will rebel and chase out Putin and his cronies, but hope is not a policy. Nor can anyone in the West be sure that some Europeans and Americans won’t help Putin’s corrupt governance, as some did before the Ukraine invasion. Germany didn’t wander blindly into the Nordstream 2 natural gas pipeline. German politicians, including former Chancellor Schroeder, guided Berlin there.

In the US, the Ukraine invasion has frightened most Republicans out of their romance with Putin. But some still spout his praise, especially lead talker Tucker Carlson and lead presidential candidate Donald Trump:

They admire him as a smart and decisive autocrat. They care not about corruption. Ukrainian President Zelensky is fortunate indeed that the president who tried to withhold weapons to extort dirt on candidate Biden is no longer in office.

In addition, the war is already roiling Western economies, hiking the price of oil, and creating vast uncertainty for European and American trade and investment. What happens in Moscow doesn’t stay in Moscow. Things will be worse for the Russians, but the West is not immune.

Tags : , , ,

Stevenson’s army, February 11

– Biden announces China review by DOD.  In visit to Pentagon, her also discusses his views on use of force.

– Axios tells of first Biden call to Xi.
– At Lawfare, analysts call for new economic tools to deal with China. [Pay attention: class will have foreign economic policy exercise related to China.]
Sanctions on Myanmar.
Defense cost-sharing deal with South Korea almost done
French think tank looks at defense issues.
Trump people botched investigation of injuries to diplomats in Cuba.

My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).

Tags : , , , , ,

Stevenson’s army, February 1

Dan Drezner has a good analysis of how Biden’s presidency is different from Trump’s — notably the refusal to comment or act on a wide range of newsworthy topics.
WSJ notes that the Treasury-run CFIUS is broadening its investigations of Chinese investments in US startups. [Be advised: CFIUS is an important part of US foreign economic policy.]
 WSJ also reports that the CIA is changing its recruitment efforts to attract millennials.
So far so good for SecState Blinken. [But honeymoons always end.]
NYT says GOP can recapture House in 2022 just by normal gerrymandering.
NYT has long long tick-tock on Trump’s efforts to overturn election.
Axios says Trump’s trade war failed miserably.

My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).

Tags : , , , , ,

Pakistan is about more than Afghanistan and India

The incoming Biden administration faces many challenges in West/South Asia, but also has an opportunity to strengthen relations with Pakistan, which could deepen peace to the region. The Wilson Center January 21 hosted a one-on-one discussion between Michael Kugelman, the Asia Program Deputy Director, and Moeed Yusuf, the current Pakistani National Security Advisor, on the future of US-Pakistan relations.

Breaking through lenses

According to Yusuf, the United States needs to stop categorizing the relationship with Pakistan through different lenses. Previous administrations have approached Pakistan with a focus on Afghanistan and India, letting those relationships guide US-Pakistan relations. This is neither beneficial nor prudent. Pakistan is a primary actor in countering terrorism in Afghanistan, but Pakistan is also a potentially strong ally economically and geopolitically.

Pakistan has been seen mainly through the prism of Afghanistan. The incoming Biden administration should capitalize on a fresh start. While Afghanistan remains a priority for both Pakistan and the United States, Islamabad and Washington also need to build stronger bilateral relations. Pakistan is able to provide counterterrorism support, but the relationship with the US needs to be expanded far beyond that. There needs to be a bilateral relationship that transcends conflict, various regional other partnerships, and geopolitical dynamics.

Pakistan’s troublesome neighbors

The relationship that the United States has with Pakistan’s neighbors can be a building block with Pakistan, but should not be seen as the core of the relationship.

As the United States continues to combat terrorism in Afghanistan, and more broadly throughout the region, Pakistan should be identified as a key facilitator of peace talks in bringing the relevant actors to the negotiating table, in partnership with the US. Similarly, India remains the priority issue in Pakistan’s foreign policy, but Islamabad wants the US to deal with India and Pakistan separately and on their own merits. If the United States wants a stronger relationship with India, to counter a rising China, there could be repercussions for the relationship with Pakistan.

Beyond business as usual

Business as usual, or a continuation of the policies of the Trump administration, is illogical. The tumultuous relations the United States has had with Pakistan over the last four years are no longer pertinent in today’s vastly different geopolitical environment. Islamabad is prioritizing an economic security paradigm that includes combatting terrorism in neighboring countries as well as internally, enabling Pakistan to engage in new economic opportunities within and beyond its borders. The economic partnerships that Pakistan envisages are rooted in cooperation and investment, rather than aid. Creating long-term development within Pakistan would benefit the United States.  

There are many opportunities for the Biden administration to build stronger relations with Pakistan, but the new approach should recognize that Pakistan is more than a partner in US Afghanistan policy. The prospects of economic growth, geopolitical strategy, and regional peace are just a few of the many factors that the US must consider when building stronger relations with Pakistan.

To watch the event in full, please click here. And here:

Tags : , , , ,

Stevenson’s army, January 25

NYT sees global links of far-right groups.
NYT also reports on China’s challenge to US in space.  But their story is so long, they added a “takeaways” summary.
But US still sees a role for B52s.

WSJ notes China surpassed US in FDI last year.
Politico says OMB was “broken” by Trump politics.
Some Democrats want to pass stimulus bill by filibuster-proof reconciliation process. Punchbowl notes that takes a long time, starting with a budget resolution, first in 3 years. CRS has a new backgrounder.
Jim Fallows assesses the Biden inaugural address.

My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).

Tags : , , , ,

Stevenson’s army, December 21

With corrections to links:

– Former SecDef Bob Gates supports Biden priorities and adds details.
– GOP Congressman opposes waiver for Austin.
– Former HPSCI chairman calling Russian hack espionage urges proportionate response.
– Law prof assesses NSA/CyberCommand split.  NYT has more reactions.
– NYT reports neo-Nazis infiltrate German police.
– FP sees problems from currency manipulation decision.

My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).

Tags : , , , ,
Tweet