Why did Putin invade Ukraine at this time?
Why did Putin choose Feb, 2022 to invade Ukraine? Why Ukraine? Why now?
Because of (sum of totals to be 100%) these 7 groups of reasons:
1) Putin’s ideas & dreams & legacy (30-40%)
2) Russians want Greater Russia (neo-USSR) (20-30%);
3) Ukraine’s geography, weakness, and NATO (15-25%);
4) Oil prices & dependence on oil & gas, Russian exports (10-20%);
5) USA weakness (10-20%);
6) Sanctions and responses (5-15%);
7)Other (0-10%)
Min [90%] to Max [160%] {90=30+20+15+10+10+5+0 ; 160=40+30+25+20+20+15+10 }
1) Putin’s ideas & dreams & legacy (30-40%)
Putin subscribes to Dugin’s Greater Russia ideas, dreams of Greater Russia.
He claims that the USSR breakup was terrible and has always wanted Ukraine-Russia reunification.
He has chosen to surround himself with bootlicking ‘Yes’ men, who advise him to do as they know he wants to do, with minimal risk notes.
He believes most Russian people in Russia want a new Greater Russia.
He thinks that most Ukrainians are essentially brother Russians.
He believes most of the 25 million Russians outside of Russia want to rejoin Russia.
He wants his legacy to be the Russian leader that reunited Russia with Ukraine.
He is willing to be the Bad Guy, like Stalin, for the Greater Russian good.
2) Russians want Greater Russia, support military (neo-USSR) (20-30%)
[people NOT Putin, but in feedback loops];
Russia has strong, modernized, efficient and effective military – will easily win. (??)
Putin’s tough guy personality means high internal popularity.
Most people like the idea of their country being Great: France with Napoleon; Hungary before Trianon; Austrians about pre-WW I Austrian Empire; Brits recalling Empire Glory.
3) Ukraine’s geography, weakness, and NATO (15-25%)
For Russia, NATO expansion into Ukraine equals NATO aggression, justifies war. (?)
Russia’s much larger military can easily and quickly beat Ukraine’s (??); it’s likely Zelenskyy will run away and allow a Russian dominated puppet. (??) {80% in Kyiv within 3 days, 90% within 2 weeks **??}
Ukraine is the populous Russian that is necessary for a Greater Russia.
Endemic corruption and instability and poverty in Ukraine.
If Ukraine becomes a success thru the EU & NATO, Putin’s ability to remain a dictator is tougher.
Crimea was full of Russians who want Russia over Ukraine leadership.
Donetsk & Luhansk (Donbas) provinces have Russian speakers.
Ukraine has been reducing Russian language use & options, and pushing Ukrainian language, which seems like (mild but real) oppression to the Russian speakers.
If Russia “loses” Ukraine to NATO, it’s unlikely to ever “get it back”; it’s also plausible to claim NATO is a threat, after Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and especially Kosovo.
NATO pushing Serbia partition by Kosovo Muslims allows by precedent Crimea and Donbas separation.
Despite losing Crimea & Donbas in 2014, Ukraine has been unable to make any military advances – Zelenskyy is unpopular and unlikely to stay and fight. (??)
4) Oil prices & dependence on oil & gas, Russian exports (10-20%)
Biden killing US fracking by executive order ensures higher prices thru less US supply (~#5)
Silly Greens against Western gas production, combined with ineffective alternatives, means increasing prices due to reduced supply without a reduced demand.
Higher oil prices gives Russia far more cash for all gov’t purposes, including military & supporter payoffs.
Germany & US under Biden support Nordstream 2 pipeline & more Russian gas to EU.
German and EU & US reduction in nuclear power increases dependence on reliable oil – solar & wind remain unreliable.
Democracies unwilling to sanction Russia to stop oil, gas, or nuclear fuel create more dependency and demonstrate weakness, addiction to cheap consumerism”; 20% of US oil imports in 2021 from Russia. (~#6)
5) USA weakness, including anti-Christianity (10-20%)
American media, government, and academia are full of liars. Russia Hoax, racism, sexism, homophobic smears against conservatives and any who disagree with radical liberals.
Can’t/ won’t even define what a “woman” is. What a joke!
US & Canada can, and do, censor “hate speech” & “Nazis” – so Russia copies this.
US is becoming anti-Christian, so Russia pretends to be pro-Christian. Against homosexual marriage, gay adoption & teaching/ indoctrinating children about gay sex.
US military more concerned about army gay pride than protecting Afghanistan women; run away.
Most US politicians seem amenable to bribes or “foundation donations”.
6) Sanctions and responses (5-15%)
Democracies unwilling to sanction Russia to stop oil, gas, or nuclear fuel demonstrate weakness.
Russia can sell its oil to China or other non-aligned buyers, tho perhaps needing a discount.
Sanctions have seldom led to significant quick change in politics of the country sanctioned.
In the worst case, Russia keeps Donbas & Crimea.
7) Other (0-10%) {I don’t believe these are so significant, but many do}
Putin is mentally ill now. Invasion was an irrational choice done because of illness.
Putin is physically sick – if he doesn’t invade soon, he’ll die before he sees it.
Putin wanted to wait until after Russian athletes won some Winter Olympic medals.
Putin is ready to be “bad guy” excuse & scapegoat for the invasion; if it turns out bad, it’s all his fault, tho he’s a Russian hero if it turns out well.
Putin’s not really fully in charge, the secret oligarchs wanted him to invade and set him up.
What are the probabilities of the future?
The situation evaluation depends on the weight placed by the decider, Putin, on each of the many facts and estimates of the futures. Forecasting the future is probabilistic.
Putin 100% decided to invade, for some combination of the above reasons that, when added up & normalized, equal 100% of the “reasons”. Among the factors are facts, analyses of facts, simulations, expectations, beliefs, desires. It’s the totality, not any one line, which caused the decision.
All analyses I’ve read can be roughly fit into this model, with each analyst emphasizing some aspect, like how weak Ukraine or the USA is, and some emphasizing NATO expansion as a threat against Russia.
It’s strange about judging decisions because of probabilities – the outcome is a known unknown, of good or bad. Think of rolling two dice. Would you bet $1000 to win $1000 that your next roll would be 4 or more (lose in only 3 of 36 possibilities, 8.33%)? How about to win $100,000? How about to win $100?
Doing this $100 bet 12 times, the expected value is to lose $1000 once, and win $100 eleven times, so it’s a “good” bet. But one could easily lose a few times early, so “risk aversion” also needs to be included. All of these bets are “good” bets – but if it happens only once, you could still lose. Most would say it was a bad decision to even bet, in those cases when you lose.
Putin thought he had some 90% chance of winning quickly.
Putin rolled snake eyes (1,1 = 2), and some think he has snake eyes, and he lost his bet that Kyiv falls fast. Lots of highly paid analysts also thought Ukraine would fall fast.
Looking at information about the Russian military – their capabilities were overestimated (higher probabilities assigned to them winning quickly).
Conversely about the Ukraine military – their capabilities were underestimated.
Most pundits got it half wrong: a) thinking Putin would not invade, or b) thinking Putin would invade and win quickly. Because those who thought it would be tough also thought Putin would think that, and thus not invade. Few, none named, thought Putin would be wrong: to invade AND fail to win quickly.
Richard Hanania has a few good notes on forecasting, this one explicit:
Russian Victory-70%; Draw-15%; Ukrainian Victory-10%; Larger war with NATO-5%
There’s a good tweet thread about good Ukraine tactics, including destroying dams that led to flooding and lots and lots of mud.
In the real world, most big decisions happen only once, so the “probability” is a measure of information, almost an unknown unknown, rather than some known frequency as in dice or cards.
Putin lost his fast win bet, but hasn’t yet lost Crimea, and probably won’t. I hope for a negotiated referendum vote, with few Russian and more NATO / unaligned non-Russian military and civilian vote observers for a fair referendum to allow the places that want to leave Ukraine to leave. It’s too late for Czech - Slovak style velvet divorce, but war can still be reduced by agreement sooner.
I fear too many Westerners support Ukraine fighting to the last Ukrainian against Russia to topple Putin. That’s not smart, nor humane. Nukes exist, and it’s far better if they’re not used.