Category Russia

The Snowballing Effects of a Virus?

Again, this is not my area of expertise, since I’m mostly into Pfizer stock speculation and such, but as the Coronavirus does not seem to be going away any time soon, probably worthwhile to look at the effects of such a disease if it continues to expand, beyond the issues of health and mortality.

Economic Effects in China: Right now, around 60 million people are in partial or full lock down. The current population of China is over 1.4 billion, so this is 4% of the population. So lets say that their economic activity is reduced by at least 20% (it may be more). Let us say this is a ripple effect that impacts three times that amount of people (as they certainly trade with others). The most immediate economic impact of the virus is on consumption and travel. So 0.12 x 0.8 = 0.96 or basically a 1% decline in the Chinese economy/growth rate. The Chinese economy is growing at around 6% a year. Now, if this virus lasts for three months, it is simply a blip on the charts. If it lasts the better part of a year, we will see a reduction in the growth rate of the economy. On the other hand, if the virus continues to spread and more people and cities are on lock down, then the economic impact could be more significant.

Note: These are all the companies who have shut down operations….

International Economics: The Chinese economy now makes up 16% of the world economy. They are certainly the manufacturing hub in many industries (for example, my first Kursk book was printed there). So, any disruption in the Chinese economy will result in a decline worldwide. These fears were amplified this last Monday morning when the DOW declined by over 500 points, which is almost a 2% drop. Now it was recorded somewhat and as of 1:00 PM on Monday was at 337 (1.16%). Still this shows the economic impact on the markets. Of course, the market going down 1 or 2% does not mean the economy is in decline, but it does indicate that this is a global concern.

Oil Prices: U.S. oil prices were down on Monday morning by nearly 2% also to $53.13 a barrel. Now oil prices directly affect consumers as we can see the fluctuations from day to day at the gas pump, but…..if also significantly impacts the economy of Russia, which relies heavily upon taxes on oil and natural gas for its budget. As of 1 PM on Monday, the exchange rate for rubles to dollars went from 62 rubles to 63 rubles.

Internal Stability in China: Keep in mind that China had a major internal unrest incident in 1989 with Tiananmen Square. They have been hesitant since then to run over people with tanks. More to the point, the continued growth of the Chinese economy has dampened much of the political and internal unrest, and will probably continue to do so as long as the economy continues to grow. Many people (and I am one of them) does consider that the development of a capitalist economy under control of a communist regime is a fundamental contradiction that at some point will lead to political unrest. This was the case 30 years ago, and if the economy stagnates or decline, I have no doubt will be the case again. Added to that, right now there has been an extended pro-democracy protest in the Chinese city of Hong Kong that has not been resolved. Is this an isolated case, being a former British colony; or is it the first of many others? I do get the sense that the stability of China is not guaranteed and could be quickly become an issue if the economy declines.

Internal Stability of Russia: The Russian economy is tied to oil prices, maybe not as much as Iran and Saudi Arabia, but enough that this is a big issue. In 2012 oil, gas and petroleum products account for over 70% of their total exports. Russia already had one extended economic decline from 2014-2015 where is actually saw its GDP decline by 3.7% in 2015. This is significant. We do note today that the when the stock markets declined by over 1%, the price of oil declined by 2% and the ruble declined by 2% also. So……what happens if the decline continues? The Russian GDP grew by only 1.2% in 2019. The next Russian election is in 2024, so they have some time to ride out any problems, but as they are busy changing the constitution into who knows what; then if we actually do see a significant decline in the Russian economy over an extended time, then the elections, or even internal stability, could become an issue.

Ukraine and sanctions and such: Not unrelated to the Russian economic problems are the sanctions imposed by the U.S. and European as a result of its actions in Ukraine, including the seizure of Crimea. This have been an issue since then, both in Russia and in U.S. politics. Needless to say, if the Russian economy declines, these issues will remain at the forefront.

Iran and Iraq: Cannot help but notice that Iran has a lot of internal turmoil and unrest, in addition to occasional head-to-head confrontations with the U.S. The Iranian economy is also heavily tied to the price of oil. Nothing fuels a protest movement like a declining economy. One could also say the same of Iraq. Of course, we have troops in Iraq.

Kuznetsov on Fire

[Photo deleted at the request of AFP]

Just noted this article:

https://news.yahoo.com/russias-only-aircraft-carrier-fire-port-news-agencies-100747109.html

This is Russia’s only carrier. It is in dock in Siberia undergoing refitting. It is supposed to be done in 2021…but this is doubtful. The Russian fleet is still extremely limited in capability.

We have written about this before.

Lives Of The Russian (And Ex-Russian) Aircraft Carriers

The Admiral Kuznetsov Adventure

Russian Fleet Strength

Our count of carriers throughout the world in 2016 is given in this post:

Chinese Carriers

2016 count:

  • U.S. 19 carriers
  • U.S. Allies: 14 carriers
  • Neutrals: 5 carriers (India, Brazil, Egypt, Thailand)
  • Potentially hostile: 2 carriers (China, Russia)
  • Total: 40 carriers

 

Lessons Learned from the Russo-Ukrainian War

I noticed that our blog was being pinged by a site I was not familiar with, so I took a look at it….and I don’t read Chinese Korean  (see: https://m.blog.naver.com/alsrb19/221127427656).

But the site had a link to a paper written by Dr. Phillip A. Karber of the Potomac Foundation. This is worth looking at:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwsSGlkg0LM2aVhrNXExQ2FVTngxbzhWYVFCSFpvNWNCdVFB/view

This was done as part of the “Historical Lessons Learned Workshop.” I gather Dr. Phillip Karber and retired Gen. Wesley Clark wandered around Ukraine a lot during 2014 and 2015. Mr. Karber was wounded in June 2015 in a MLRS strike at Bebedynsky during the process. While I have never met him, Phil Karber has been around for a while, having worked for Andy Marshall (OSD Net Assessment). A few highlights:

  1. “…the struggle in Ukraine has involved the largest scale battles in Europe since the end of the Second World War.” (page 2)
  2. “The Russo-Ukrainian War has been full of surprises. First, it was totally unexpected.” (page 2)
  3. “A third surprise is the relative lack of Western attention given to the military aspects of the Russo-Ukrainian War; particularly given the unexpected scale and duration of the conflict….” (page 3)
  4. Artillery: “In the Ukraine conflict the author has witnessed units firing 300-400 rounds per tube per day. This increased intensity of fire is both outgoing and incoming.” (page 16)
  5. “Data from the Ukraine conflict show that artillery is producing approximately 85% of all casualties on both sides.” (page 17)
  6. “In July 2014….In the space of six weeks, the Russians launched 53 fire strikes at 40 different locations, which decimated Ukrainian forces. For example, at Zelenopillya, in a combined MLRS fire strike that lasted no more than three minutes, two Ukrainian mechanized battalions were virtually wiped out with the combined effects of top-attack munitions and thermobaric warheads.” (page 18)
  7. “Since the end of the Cold War, armies around the world have given increased emphasis to light Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV), which prioritizes mobility and fire-power over survivability. The evidence coming in from the Ukrainian conflict seriously questions the validity of that emphasis.” (page 26)

There are probably a few other significant points that I passed on.

The Battles of the Donetsk Airport (May 2014 – Jan 2015)

Just published by The Institute of Land Warfare is a paper by Major Amos C. Fox, U.S. Army called “Cyborgs at Little Stalingrad”: A Brief History of the Battle of the Donetsk Airport. It is not long (16 pages) and definitely worth a read.

A few highlights:

  1. “Contrary to conventional narratives on the primacy and high-mindedness of maneuver warfare and the crippling effects of electronic and cyber warfare, positional warfare and sieges are the zeitgeist of contemporary war.” (page 12)
  2. “Positional battles and sieges have also commanded the counter-Islamic State campaigns in Iraq, Syria and the Philippines.” (page 12)
  3. “These battles are important because they remind students of war that rugged, land-centric combat arms warfare has not been thrown into the dustbin of history but is instead alive and well.” (page 16)
  4. He does document the downing of 10 Ukrainian aircraft in May – July 2014 (pages 11-12), but leaves out any reference to the downing of Flight MH17 on 17 July 2014 over Eastern Ukraine, killing 298 civilians.

To quote from the last paragraph of my book, War by Numbers (page 328):

The post-Cold War world appears to be world of many small conflicts…the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001 proved that the United States is not immune to attack and that we do have to remain engaged with the rest of the world to some degree. Certainly U.S. armed forces will be part of that engagement, and they will be called upon to fight a range of wars, from drone strikes and special operations to full-scale guerrilla wars and conventional campaigns. All must be addressed and planned for.

Throwing the Dice

This is a follow-up to the blog post:

China and Russia Defeats the USA

One of readers commented on this post and posted the following link: Paper Wargames and Policy Making

In case you are not reading the comments to our blog post, wanted to make sure this was brought to your attention. The article is worth taking a look at just for the pictures. A few highlights:

  1. “In my lifetime, computer-based simulation have largely taken over analytical gaming, sometimes bringing new levels of investigative power, but often just providing the illusion of it as the details of the models and their simplifying assumptions become invisible to players and to the policymakers whose decisions the games are supposed to inform.”
  2. However, it gradually became clear [with the Baltic states wargame] — rather disconcertingly–that we were out in front of most of the official planning, not following in its wake.”
  3. “The resulting game….resolves combat using 12-hour turns and 10-km hexes; units are battalions of ground forces, SAM batteries, and half-squadrons of aircraft (12 fighters or six bombers).”
  4. “…and they like throwing the dice.”

China and Russia Defeats the USA

A couple of recent articles on that latest wargaming effort done by RAND:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/03/rand_corp_wargames_us_loses_to_combined_russiachina_forces.html

The opening line states: “The RAND Corporation’s annual ‘Red on Blue’ wargame simulation found that the United States would be a loser in a conventional confrontation with Russia and China.”

A few other quotes:

  1. “Blue gets its ass handed to it.”
  2. “…the U.S. forces ‘suffer heavy losses in one scenario after another and still can’t stop Russia or China from overrunning U.S. allies in the Baltics or Taiwan:”

Also see: https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/03/article/did-rand-get-it-right-in-its-war-game-exercise/

A few quotes from that article:

  1. “The US and NATO are unable to stop an attack in the Balkans by the Russians,….
  2. “…and the United States and its allies are unable to prevent the takeover of Taiwan by China.

The articles do not state what simulations were used to wargame this. The second article references this RAND study (RAND Report) but my quick perusal of it did not identify what simulations were used. A search on the words “model” and “wargame” produced nothing. The words “simulation” and “gaming” leads to the following:

  1.  “It draws on research, analysis, and gaming that the RAND Corporation has done in recent years, incorporating the efforts of strategists, regional specialists, experts in both conventional and irregular military operations, and those skilled in the use of combat simulation tools.”
  2. “Money, time, and talent must therefore be allocated not only to the development and procurement of new equipment and infrastructure, but also to concept development, gaming and analysis, field experimentation, and exploratory joint force exercises.”

Anyhow, curious as to what wargames they were using (JICM – Joint Integrated Contingency Model?). I was not able to find out with a cursory search.

What would a reconstituted Soviet Union/Russian Empire look like?

The Soviet Union broke up into 15 separate countries in December 1991. What would a reconstituted Soviet Union/Russian Empire look like, if that is indeed one of the goals of Russian leadership (and some people say it is).

1. Russia, 2. Ukraine, 3. Belarus, 4. Uzbekistan, 5. Kazakhstan, 6. Georgia, 7. Azerbaijan, 8. Lithuania, 9. Moldavia, 10. Latvia, 11, Kirghizia, 12. Tajikistan, 13. Armenia, 14. Turmenistan, 15. Estonia.

 

The three Baltic states appear to be out of their grasp, being members of NATO. They are militarily protected by an alliance of 29 members, and their economic growth has been significant. The per capita income of Estonia is $19,840 (IMF 2017), while that of Russia is $10,608. Half of Russia’s GDP is in Moscow, just to drive home what the rest of the country is like.

Some of these countries are united into the Eurasian Economic Union. It consists of five countries: Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan. It was Ukrainian President Yanukovych’s decision to develop closer economic ties with Russia and the Eurasian Union and back away from an association agreement with the European Union (28 countries) that started the Euromaiden protests in November 2013 that lead to his removal from power in February 2014 (and the Russian seizure of Crimea and the Russian-influenced revolts in Lugansk and Donetsk). The Eurasian Union flag is below. Interesting map choice.

So who would be in a reconstituted Soviet Union/ Russia Empire?

There are the five “stans” in Central Asia (Kazakstan, Uzbekiskan, Kyrgystan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan). By the nature of their geography they are somewhat isolated, landlocked, and potentially could be brought back into Russia’s orbit. Two countries are already members of the Russian created Eurasian Union. There is also Belarus, another Eurasian Union member. Belarus does not have a strong history of independence and could be brought back into Russia’s orbit. Belarus might very well rejoin Russia after its dictator Lukaschenko (age 64) moves on to wherever he ends up. These could reconstitute a new force if they could be brought into Russia’s orbit. Some stats:

                            (2018 est.)                 (IMF 2017)

                            Population                 GDP (millions)

Russia                  146,877,088              $1,527,469

Uzbekistan             32,653,900                    47,883

Kazakhstan            18,292,700                  160,839

Belarus                     9,478,200                    54,436

Tajikistan                  8,931,000                      7,234

Kyrgystan                 6,309,300                      7,061

Turkmenistan           5,851,466                    37,926

Sub-Total              228,393,654              1,842,848

 

This adds up. It is more significant demographically than economically. The per capita income of Uzbekistan is $1,491 per year and Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are worse. This recombined country would move from being the 12th richest in the world up to being the 10th richest, ahead of Canada but behind Italy.

Now there are three countries in the Caususus: Georgia, Azerbaijain, and Armenia and four odd political entities (Abkhazia, North Ossetia, Artsakh and Chechnya). Of the three former Soviet countries, Georgia is openly hostile to Russia (and Abkhazia and North Ossetia have been carved from it) and Azerbaijain and Armenia are hostile to each other. They fought a war over the province of Nagorno-Karabakh from 1988-1994, which Armenia won. It is now the Republic of Artsakh.

Only Armenia is a member of the Eurasian Union. It will be difficult for Russia to bring these three nations into its fold for a number of reasons, but again they remain relatively isolated with only Iran and Turkey as the neighbors in the region. So…lets us assume this somehow happens:

                            Population                 GDP (millions)

Old Sub-total     228,393,654                1,842,848

Azerbaijain             9,943,226                      40,670

Georgia                  3,729,600                      15,230

Armenia                  2,969,800                     11,037

Abkhazia                    240,705                     N/A

Artsakh                      145,053                      N/A

New sub-total    245,422,038                1,909,785

 

They are all pretty poor, with Azerbaijan having a per capita income of $4,141 and Georgia and Armenia having similar slightly lower numbers.This really does not get a new Russia Empire back to being a world power. Italy still has a larger GDP.

This now assembles 10 of the original 15 republics together. The three Baltic states are out of reach without a world war, and that leaves only Ukraine and Moldova.

                          Population                 GDP

Ukraine             42,248,129                 109,321

Moldova              3,550,900                    7,945

Transnistria           470,600                      N/A

 

Note that the Ukrainian population figures excludes Crimea and Sevastopol but includes Lugansk and Donetsk. The per capita income of Ukraine is $2,583 and Moldova is $2,280.

It is clear that if one was going to re-constitute the Soviet Union/Russian Empire that Ukraine is the real prize here. Some argue that this is what the conflict in 2013-2014 was about, and is the source of the continued conflict over Crimea, Lugansk and Donetsk.

 

P.S. The stats for the three Baltic states are:

                       Population                 GDP

Lithuania        2,799,127                    47,263

Latvia             1,923,400                    30,319

Estonia           1,319,133                    25,973

Population over Time (US vs USSR)

Over last decades, the population of major countries like China, India, Soviet Union/ Russia, Japan, Germany and the United States have changed. This has clearly changed the balance of power between them and will continue to as we move forward into the future. For example:

Unite States versus Soviet Union:

                                              Soviet Union/

Year           United States      Russia                    Ratio

1950/51      151.3 (1950)        182.3 (1951)           0.83-to-1

1980/82      226.5 (1980)        270.0 (1982)           0.84-to-1

2018           308.7                    142.9                      2.16-to-1

2050           402                       132                         3.05-to-1

 

Now, this is certainly the biggest change we will look at. Russia went from almost being a world power to being a pale reflection of its past power and glory (I am willing to argue that the Soviet Union was never really a world power….it just pretended to be one). Added to that is the economic changes over time. I hesitate to even discuss what the GDP of the Soviet Union was, as the ruble was artificially inflated. When it was floated in the 1990s, it went from one ruble per 1.11 dollars (it always was worth more than a dollar in the Soviet era, of course)…to something like 3,000 rubles to a dollar. They then shaved off two the zeros for the new ruble to make it less than 30 rubles to a dollar. The current exchange rate is 65 rubles to a dollar.

The current Russian GDP is 1.5 trillion (IMF 2017). This is compared to the United States GDP of 19.4 trillion (IMF 2017). So, right now, Russia has less than half the population and less than a tenth of the economy of the United States. In 2050 it will have only a third of the population of the U.S. Who knows what the economy will be. The Russia economy might still be pretty dependent on the price of oil.

With its population declining, its work force aging, its economy built upon export of oil and gas, with wide spread corruption, and an entrenched leadership; it is hard to imagine that Russia’s economy will have an extended economic growth that will return it to being a great power. Its economic growth last year (2017) was 1.5%. Russia is currently the 11th or 12th richest country in the world. It is behind Canada. My seat-of-the-pants estimate is that Russia will still not be among the 10 richest countries in 2050.

For Russia to return to its old glory, it really sort of needs to re-constitute the Soviet Union or the old Russian Empire to some degree. Some would argue that this has indeed been part of Putin’s plan. I will examine this in a future post.

Really Old Stuff

Oldest living animal (558 million years ago): https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/health/oldest-known-animal-fossil-intl/index.html

Oldest human (homo sapien) (300,000 years ago):  https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

Oldest human (homo sapien) outside of Africa (177,000 – 194,000 years ago): https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/25/health/oldest-modern-human-fossil-israel-intl/index.html

 

Demographics of Russia

I am far from an expert on demographics, but it something I do occasionally pay attention to. When it comes to measuring long-term military power and world influence, the basic measurement of power is wealth times population. Or, you can simply stack the countries up by GNP. This puts Russia 11th on the list, below Canada. But looking at Russia’s population alone is useful.

As of January 2018 the population of Russia is estimated at 146.9 million people. This does make it the 9th most populous country on the planet. This does include Crimea and Sevastopol, which has 2.4 million people.

The population of Russia was in steady decline from 1991 to 2013. Even in 2017 Russia was only producing 1.61 children per women. This is below the replacement rates of 2.1. The last time the Russian fertility rate was above 2 was in 1989 and that was only for 7 years. It was below 2 for most of the time before that going back to mid-1960s. Low child birth rates and small families rates seem to be very much a part of the culture. I know a lot of Russians that are only children.

Their population is growing ever so slowly due to immigration. For 2017 they had a net migration of 211,878, and a natural population loss of 135,818. This gave them population gains of 76,060, which is a very small annual gain (0.05% gain a year). In 2010, ethnic Russians made up 77% of the total population.

The population of Russia was 147.4 million in 1990, 148.7 million in 1991, and then it declined at a rate of 0.5% a year, dropped to 142.9 million in 2010 and has increased to 146.9 since then by immigration and seizure of Crimea and Sevastopol. In 2006 the Russian government started simplifying immigration laws, encouraging immigration of ethnic Russian from former Soviet republics. There is probably a limit to how many more people this can draw in. Russia also has about 7 million temporary migrant workers (these are 2011 figures). The Russian population tends to be older than most. The demographic “pyramid” is anything but pyramidal in shape.

As of 2018, the UN is still predicting that Russia’s population will fall to 132 million by 2050. See: https://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Country-Profiles/

Now, lets compare the population of the Soviet Union/Russia to the United States over time:

                Soviet Union/Russia               United States

1951        182.3 million                             151.3 (1950)

1959        209.0                                        179.3 (1960)

1970        241.7                                        203.2

1977        257.7                                        226.5 (1980)

1982        270.0                                        226.5 (1980)

1990        290.9                                        248.7

1991        293.0                                        248.7 (1990)

2002       145.2 (Russia only)                   281.4 (2000)

2010       142.9                                         308.7

2018       146.9                                         328.3 (est.)

 

So, during the height of the “we will bury you” era the Soviet Union had a population of about 20% larger than the U.S. Russia now has a population less than half the U.S. (and a GDP of less than Canada). It appears that their population will not be growing very fast and may well continue to decline.