russia

RUSSIA’S LEADERS

To Mark Galeotti, Putin is a pragmatic ruler who reminds Russians of their history of Tsarist control and leadership. Time will tell whether Russia’s citizens become discontented with war, lost lives, and victims (some of which are Russian Ukrainians) who choose to live in Ukraine.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

A Short History of Russia (How the World’s Largest Country Invented Itself, from the Pagans to Putin)

Author: Mark Galeotti

Narration by: Mark Galeatti

Mark Galeotti (Author, British historian, writer, honorary professor at UCL’s School of East European Studies.)

“A Short History of Russia” notes that Russia has historically felt insecure about its identity as a part of the European community. Galeotti notes Russia has no natural borders and no single ethnic core. Reaching back in history, the author notes the royal history of Russia’s Tsars (men and women who have descended from royalty). The 1917 Russian revolution turned Russia’s monarchy into a communist autocracy that leads to the eventual ascension of Putin. Putin becomes leader of a reconstituted Russia that reminds one of Russia’s Tsars. Galeatti argues Putin’s Russia considers itself part of the European continent despite its Mongol history that profoundly reshaped Russia’s political culture.

Mongols are an East Asian ethnic group which originated in Mongolia and China.

Galeotti argues Russia has always aspired to be a major influence and power in Europe. Their history of centralized authority and territorial expansion is characteristic of Russia’s desire to be a dominant part of European culture. Despite Russia’s cultural intent to be part of Europe, it drives to have its own identity as a continental influencer rather than conforming culture. The rise of communism, and much later, Putin is founded on Russia’s history of hierarchal leadership and cultural belief.

Tsarist Russia.

Galeotti paints a picture of Tsarist Russia that becomes a model for the rise of autocratic communism. Russian Tsars emphasized centralized control of the country. The Tsars were suspicious of citizen influence or control of the country. They set the table for rule from above because of the lack of any civil organization. Russia had a cultural background for the creation of an autocratic state. The effect of that background set the table for Stalin and today’s Vladmir Putin. Stalin establishes his rule through the use of a secret service to assure loyalty to its leader, Joseph Stalin. Stalin uses that secret service to eliminate rivals to his power. In the interregnum between Stalin and Putin, Mikhail Gorbachev attempts to reform the communist party to an openness for change through his personal effort and a home-fore initiative from party leaders, workers, and managers. Gorbachev fails for many reasons; not the least of which is the terrorist and murderous experience of Stalin’s leadership. But, Gorbachov’s is also because of his failure to gain party support and the consequent departure of many states that chose to leave the U.S.S.R.

Mikhail Gorbachev (Pres. of the Soviet Union 1990-1991, General Secy. of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1985 to 1991.)

Gorbachev takes control of the Russian government with the intent of restructuring weaknesses that had grown in the directionless vacuum created by the death of Stalin. Boris Yeltsin interferes with Gorbachev’s effort when he becomes President of the Russian Federation in 1991. Yelsin complicated Gorbachev’s reform by looking to a young KGB officer named Vladimir Putin to join the administration. Yeltsin’s alcoholism compounded growing disorganization of the Russian government. Gorbachev loses control of the communist party and the balance of personal interests between factions of the U.S.S.R., in part, because of Yeltsin’s interference and mismanagement.

Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine.

Chernobyl becomes a symbol of what is going wrong with centralized government control. Putin’s steely determination reminds Russians of a leader who could stabilize what remained of the Russian empire after the Baltic states and Ukraine left the Union. The ideas of perestroika and glasnost interfered with the U.S.S.R.’s imperialist system of government. However, public discontent with Gorbchev’s rule renewed public interest in Tsarist style control of government like that which is implied, if not recommended by former KBG agent, Vladimir Putin.

Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, President of Russia 1990-1991.)

Galeotti believes Gorbachev’s perestroika and glasnost recommendations reveal deep structural weaknesses that are magnified by Boris Yeltsin’s incompetence. However, Galeotti argues Putin is not a master strategist nor a villain. Putin is characterized as an opportunist who takes control of Russia in ways that were experienced during Tsarist and later Stalinist rule. He reinstitutes personal networks of government control by rewarding those who comply with his rule while hollowing out leaders and institutions that interfere with his power. Putin makes himself a modern Tsar by governing with a circle of loyalists. Loyalty to Putin is the cornerstone of his governance. Putin manipulates the fragility of Russian bureaucracies meant to improve the lives of Russian citizens while endorsing the greed of the wealthy. Control and loyalty become more important than effectiveness or efficiency. Loyalty to Putin is the mark of value in his administration.

Putin clearly takes the side of autocratic rulers because of his belief in control of circumstances and belief in loyalty to those in charge.

Putin in Syria supports its dictator, Bashar al-Assad, who flees to Russia when deposed.

Bashar al-Assad (Rose to power in Syria in 2000 having inherited his position as Syria’s ruler from his father. As a fellow autocrat, he is fully supported by Putin.)

Galeotti notes Putin is not omnipotent but is a leader whom Russians are familiar with from past history. Centralization of power has been a hallmark of Russia’s growth with a desire for Russia to be identified as a powerful and important part of Europe. To the author, Putin is a pragmatic ruler who reminds Russians of their history of Tsarist control and leadership. Time will tell whether Russia’s citizens become discontented with Putin’s aggression, the Ukrainian war, war’s lost lives, and its victims (many of which are Russian Ukrainians).

A HONG KONG LIFE

Like American capitalism, Chinese communism has its faults. One big difference is American capitalism offers a higher level of individual freedom with legal rights to defend oneself in a court of law (that is, of course, if you are not an immigrant).

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Red Roulette (An Insider’s Story of Wealth, Power, and Vengeance in Today’s China.)

Author: Desmond Shum

Narration by: Tim Chiou

Desmond Shum (Author, born in Shanghai in 1968, former Hong Kong businessman who lives in the UK. with a son born in the U.S.)

“Red Roulette” is an amazing personal story of a former Chinese citizen who marries a successful Chinese woman, Whitney Duan. She is disappeared by the Xi government in 2017. Shum and Duan were married from 2004 to 2015. His wife’s fate is unknown to Shum as he writes this book. Amazingly, Ms. Duan calls Shum four years after she is disappeared by China to ask him to not publish his book. Shum believes this is the first public contact by Duan since her disappearance in 2017.

Ms. Duan had chosen to capitalize on a system of doing business in China the way it had been done for many years. That system is riven with a kind of societal corruption revealed in “Red Roulette” that has grown with communism in China.

Women simply want an equal opportunity to succeed in pursuit of money, power, and prestige, i.e. all the secular objectives men take for granted.

Desmond Shum reveals surprises to many Americans about China’s culture. Despite a presumption of many non-Chinese, Shum explains power is personal, not institutional in China. One might presume that CCP’s control of wealth and power in China comes from the party and its leaders. However, wealth in China is only influenced by the communist government through a social network of beliefs. Shum explains personal relationships and connections are built on favors, gifts, and mutual obligations that are debts that carry the reality of power in China. This explains the title of the book “Red Roulette” in the sense that success in Chinese society is a game of chance based on bets placed on the value of favors, and gifts that CCP members believe have worth.

Debt for favors and gifts is in the eye of the beholder which makes fair payment a mysterious and chance driven calculation. Adding to that complexity is the power of a CCP leader to erase a citizen socially, legally, and economically. By erasure, Shum explains citizens may be detained, prevented from family contact, denied legal representation, arrested, impoverished, and isolated from any social contact. Shum explains his ex-wife, Whitney Duan, vanished for years with no charges, no trial, and no record of her disappearance.

Xi Jinping (Leader of the CCP in China.)

The CCP elite govern China through relationships among themselves, not by official meetings or party leadership orders that are necessarily based on definable communist dogma. Everything happens behind the scenes. Official meetings, if there are any, are strictly “for show”. Shum’s admits in his personal story that he and his ex-wife became wealthy through a corrupt relationship with Zhang Beili, one of the CCP apparatchiks and power brokers. One may argue the CCP is similar to the Congress of the United States. Wealthy capitalists, like CCP apparatchiks, game the stock market and society through political connection with elected government officials

Deng Xiaoping launched an initial shift away from Maoist central planning despite ordering the crackdown on Tiananmen Square in 1989.

As somewhat of a realist, one understands governance is based on leaders presumed power, wealth, and political influence. Shum argues China’s economic modernization and capitalism began with Deng Xiaoping who rose to power after Tiananmen with Hu Jintao continuing China’s economic boom. Shum argues today’s Xi is increasing control of the CCP and the economy with the traditions of Chinese society. In the author’s opinion, China is reinstituting a Mao-style autocracy that is spreading fear across the country.

In fairness to Shum’s assessment of China, there is evidence of America’s slip into autocracy in today’s economy.

Zuboff’s scholarly examination of American internet mavens concludes “…Surveillance Capitalism” will lead to Orwell’s “1984” or B.F. Skinner’s “Beyond Freedom and Dignity”.

Shum believes Xi Jinping’s CCP anti-corruption campaign is only a pretext for power consolidation. In Shum’s opinion, Xi’s targeted removal of CCP apparatchiks is not because of their corruption but because they rival his power over the party. Xi’s campaign on corruption increases fear among CCP members and influencers that reinforce traditions of China’s rule by personal relationship and connection. Xi’s goal is to increase personal loyalty to himself which is part and parcel of the history of Chinese social norms. Shum’s evidence of corruption is the increase in disappearances, secret detentions, arrests of businesspeople without charges, and insistence on what is characterized as party discipline.

Whitney Duan and Shum when they were married.

Whitney Duan’s disappearance is Shum’s primary example of Xi’s Chinese governance. Duan is characterized as ambitious, brilliant, and determined. Her rise to power in Chinas is from close relationships she develops with people who have influence in the communist party. She befriends Zhang Beili, the wife of the Vice Premier of the CCP, Wen Jiabao. Because of that association, Duan has privileged access to information about land deals and major real-estate projects in China. She uses that information to make deals with advanced knowledge that result in great economic wealth for her and her former husband. Shum marries Duan and they both capitalize on insider information they gain from Duan’s relationships. One presumes the marriage ends because of the stresses and political dangers involved in their common business interests.

The quality of Kafka’s story in “The Trial” is the human desire for freedom that is not extinguished even in the darkest times of a country’s repression. This is a hope one presumes for both China and America, but human nature gets in the way.

In 2017, two years after the author’s divorce, Whitney Duan disappears. There are no charges, no trial, no public disclosure, and she is unable to contact any of her family including the son she has with Shum. No one knows if she is dead or alive. The state refuses to say she has been detained. One presumes, she is arrested because of Xi Jinping’s anti-corruption campaign and his purge of some party members like Wen Jiabao. Interestingly, just before the book is to be published, Whitney Duan calls Shum to ask him not to publish. Obviously, she is alive.

One big difference between American capitalism and Chinese communism is a higher level of individual freedom with legal rights to defend oneself in a court of law (that is, of course, if you are not an immigrant). That is a significant difference between China and America. However, both countries are impacted by bad actors that game the system based on personal relationship and influence with political leaders.

On the one hand, this story reinforces belief that Xi is trying to reform the CCP. On the other, the methodology of autocracy offers no defense against the injustice of being condemned without trial.

One concludes Whitney Duan lost in the game of Chinese Roulette by being part of a relationship that gave her inside information from the CCP. Her disappearance is proof of the theme of Shun’s book about the importance of relationships and connections to gain power and financial success in Chinese society. Like American capitalism, Chinese communism has its faults.

Ukrainian Independence

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Our Enemies Will Vanish (The Russian Invasion and Ukraine’s War of Independence)

Author: Yaroslav Trofimoy

Narration by: David Furr

Yaroslav Trofimov (Author, Ukrainian-born Italian author and journalist, foreign correspondent.)

“Our Enemies Will Vanish” is a brutal eyewitness account of the beginning of Russia’s invasion and war in Ukraine. Yaroslav Trofimov explains why Putin fails to achieve a takeover and annexation of Ukraine despite having an overwhelming military and economic advantage. Putin had a well provisioned and professional military force. Trofimov’s book is an insightful follow up on Karatnycky’s history of Ukraine’s leadership in “Battleground Ukraine”. Trofimov reminds one of the role Viktor Yanukovchy played in surreptitiously aiding Russia’s takeover of Crimea. Yanukovchy had fled to Russia and was waiting to return to the Presidency of Ukraine when and if Russia won the war. Having read “Battleground…” Ukraine’s resistance owes a debt to former President Yuschenko’s role in reinforcing a pro-Western leaning of Ukraine’s citizens. At the same time, Petro Proshenko (President of Ukraine before Zelensky) is shown to be equally important for having begun the rebuilding of Ukraine’s military.

Frenemies are defined as people who look friendly on the surface but contain underlying rivalry, and distrust.

Trofimov clearly explains why Putin fails to takeover Ukraine. He underestimated the capabilities of Ukrainian resistance. Putin’s predilection for complete control of the invasion created ground action confusion that could not adapt to circumstances of Ukrainian resistance. Russia’s ground forces could not effectively coordinate their actions because of Putin’s insistence on direct command and control. In contrast, the Ukrainian leadership made decisions based on ground circumstances rather than centralized command and control. Putin clearly underestimated Ukraine’s national awakening. The early atrocities of Bucha and Irpin where 400 civilians were murdered and many were imprisoned and tortured are examples of Russia’s brutal tactics. The heavy shelling of Irpin destroyed neighborhoods, homes, and schools. Satellite imagery and eyewitness accounts reinforced Ukraine’s moral and political resolve to defend their country.

Access to drugs for infection are a concern for Ukranian fighters.

Trofimov characterizes Russia’s attack of Mariupol as an attempt to “wipe a city off the face of the earth”. He vivifies the scale of destruction with a view of residential districts that are flattened, civilians are left without food, water, or heat and hospitals, theaters, and shelters are bombed. If one is wounded in combat, Ukrainians have no access to drugs to treat infection. A relatively minor wound could become a death sentence. Nevertheless, Mariupol became a heroic last stand and a symbol of Ukraine’s resolve to remain free of Russian occupation.

The brutality and slaughter of war is clearly brought to a reader/listener’s attention by Trofimov. The atrocity in Bucha occurs early in the Russian invasion. Families hide in basements without heat or electricity. People are shot with their bodies left in the street as Russians begin moving house to house to take food, phones, and whatever they wanted. Men who were captured were interrogated and tortured. Citizens were executed at checkpoints for being suspected of helping local Ukrainians. Door to door killings and summary executions were made on all who were viewed as enemies of Russia. Russian troops were spreading systemic terror to control the population. The immorality of war is brought home in Russia’s Bucha campaign. In Trofimov’s opinion, Bucha is an example of why Putin will fail to remake Ukraine a part of Russia.

Trofimov suggests Zelensky’s wartime leadership became critically important for the survival of Ukraine.

Trofimov argues Zelensky’s personal bravery changed the course of the war. One remembers the video of Zelensky on American TV standing with fellow Ukrainians saying, “we are all here” in Kyiv. He believes Zelensky united Ukrainian society against Putin’s invasion. He rejects evacuation offers, maintains government continuity, and enlists the Western world in resistance to Russia’s invasion. Trofimov feels Zelensky’s leadership became critically important for the survival of Ukraine as an independent nation.

Kraken fighters in Ukraine.

The creation of what becomes known as the Kraken fighters illustrates the ferocity, professionalization, and psychology of volunteer Ukrainian fighters in comparison to Russian conscripts. The Kraken unit’s utilization of urban combat and high-risk operations contribute to many of Ukraine’s territorial reversals of Russian land confiscations. Ukraine’s military competence grows with the Kraken’s successes. Though the Kraken were not the largest Ukrainian warrior group, they were a unit from Kharkiv that motivated frontline fighters.

Mariupol occupation by Russia.

Trofimov does not ignore the territorial gains made by Russia in their invasion of Ukraine. Their early success in Eastern Ukraine is stalled despite their gains. They did capture Mariupol, but it became a symbol of Russia’s brutality that hardened Ukrainian resistance. The Russians capture Severodonetsk and Lysychansk in 2022 and inflict a great deal of damage on Ukrainian infrastructure. However, Trofimov argues these were tactical, not strategic successes. Importantly, Trofimov notes Kyiv is not captured, Ukrainian morale has been maintained, and the West’s support remains strong. He believes Ukraine will ultimately retain its independence.

Ukraine’s fight for independence.

Trofimov argues Ukraine will survive Russia’s invasion and remain a sovereign nation, but it will remain a long struggle. Considering the age of Putin, i.e., he is 73, and growing discontent of some Russian oligarchs, the war may be ended sooner rather than later. Men like Andrey Meinichenko, one of Russia’s richest men, and several others complain about high interest rates and the war’s economic strain on Russia. It is not that they are anti-Putin, but they have economic interests that are being challenged by the war. One wonders how long Putin will last if the Ukraine war continues.

BATTLEGROUND UKRAINE

A reader/listener of “Battleground Ukraine” infers Putin will fail because of Russia’s flagging economy and weakening military. The Ukraine war may go on for many more months, but its economic devastation and human deaths will end with Ukraine as a sovereign country, and presumably, a Russia with a different President.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Battleground Ukraine (From Independence to the War with Russia)

Author: Adrian Karatnycky

Narration by: Daniel Henning

Adrian Karatnycky (Author, Ukrainian American political analyst.)

“Battleground Ukraine” is an important history of the transition of Ukraine from being part of the U.S.S.R. to an independent nation-state. The author offers a chronological political history of Ukraine’s drive for independence after glasnost. Karatnycky outlines the achievements and setbacks of three decades and six leadership changes in Ukraine’s Government. He shows nation-building is no easy task for a country that is split between desire for independence and a history of Soviet Union domination.

In researching the qualification of Adrian Karatnycky, one finds he is considered a leading analyst who has written about Ukraine in publications like Foreign Policy, The Wall Street Journal, Foreign Affairs, The Atlantic, and National Review.

Adrian Karatnycky is characterized as a Ukrainian American political analyst, and a democracy advocate for Ukraine. He is a managing partner of a consulting firm representing clients with interests in Ukraine. He co-founded a cultural initiative to promote positive relations between Ukrainians and Jews and has studied Russian Ukrainian’ relations, written a number of articles about Ukrainian human rights, political freedoms, and its development as a civil society. He understands and speaks English and Ukrainian, and presumably Russian.

Leonid Kraychuk (1991-1994, First President of Ukraine)

His book is informative but complicated because of unfamiliarity with most of the six leaders of Ukraine after its separation from the U.S.S.R. The first president of independent Ukraine is Leonid Kravchuk (1991-1994). Kravchuk presided over the breakup and helped establish the independent nation of Ukraine. According to this history, Kravchuk seems reluctant to create a decisive break with the Soviet-era experience. The authoritarian habits of administration led to the blossoming of oligarchic networks in Ukraine that resemble the oligarchs who control the Russian economy under Putin today. The growth of Ukraine as a relatively free capitalist country is sidelined by Kravchuk’s rule. Nevertheless, Kravchuk’s administration appears to have accomplished the break from the U.S.S.R. without civil war.

Leonid Kuchma (1994-2004, Second President of Ukraine.)

The second leader of Ukraine is Leonid Kuchma (1994-2004). The author notes Kuchma accepted the growth and corruption of oligarchs in Ukraine. In some sense, the economy stabilized under Kuchma’s rule while improving ties with Russia and even the West. However, authoritarianism is reinforced by a cadre of oligarchs that corrupt Ukrainian society and enrich themselves while reinforcing attachment to Russia.

Viktor Yushchenko (2005-2010, Third President of Ukraine.)

The third leader is Viktor Yushchenko (2005-2010). In 2004, the Orange Revolution begins in Ukraine with nationwide protests, civil disobedience, and political mobilization against oligarchic rule in Ukraine. Kuchma is replaced by Yushchenko as a result of a Ukrainian Supreme Court ruling that demands a new vote. That vote results in the election of Yushchenko. Yushchenko is characterized by Karatnycky as a pro-Western democrat. He allows Ukraine media to remain free by not repressing its citizens. However, Yushchenko is characterized as a political failure who, at best, creates space for the growth of democracy in Ukraine. Though Crimea is not lost during Yushchenko’s rule because he resisted Russian military expansion, he fails to move his country toward democracy.

Crimea’s annexation by Russia in March 2014.

Russia had a base in Crimea but its role in the invasion and confiscation of Crimean territory expanded with the next Ukrainian President’s administration. At worst, Yushchenko’s political ineptness and weak governance paved the way for a more kleptocratic Ukrainian President named Viktor Yanukovych (2010-2014). As Yushchenko leaves office, Russia lays plans for the invasion of Donbas in 2014.

Viktor Yanukovych (2010-2014, Fourth President of Ukraine.)

Karatnycky views Yanukovych as the latest pro-Russian ruler of Ukraine. Yanukovych uses his position as President to enrich his family and allow Russian intelligence service to infiltrate the Ukrainian government. In the author’s opinion, Yanukovych opened the door to Russian aggression which led Russia to surreptitiously invade Donbas and annex Crimea. Karatnycky infers Putin launches the Donbas incursion as a result of a power vacuum created by Yanukovych who flees Kyiv on February 22, 2014. Crimea is annexed by Russia on February 23, 2014. The Donbas incursion begins in April 2014.

Ukrainian corruption during the Yanukovych presidency.

By a slim margin of 3.5% Yanukovych won the Ukrainian presidency in 2010. He escapes to Russia in February 2014 after ordering a violent crackdown on Ukrainian protesters. Karatnycky’s assessment of Yanukovych is highly negative. He argues Yanukovych centralized Presidential power, weakened independent institutions, persecuted political opponents, and drew the government closer to Putin’s Russia. He defeated Uylia Tymoshenko, a pro-Western leader, who is imprisoned in 2011 during the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. Yanukovych remains in Russia today and is convicted in absentia for treason in aiding Russia during his term in office.

Petro Poroshenko (2014-2019, Fifth President of Ukraine.)

After Russia’s incursion in Donbas, Ukraine elects Petro Poroshenko (2014-2019). Karatnycky suggests Poroshenko recognizes Ukraine’s military has to be rebuilt because of Yanukovych’s neglect. Poroshenko turns to the West for support in the battles occurring in Donbas. His appeal is answered with U.S. and EU backing that secures sanctions against Russia. Ukraine increases NATO cooperation to make Ukraine a frontline for democracy. As a delaying tactic, in Karatnycky’s opinion, ceasefires were agreed to by Poroshenko in order to give Ukraine more time to rebuild its military. In the author’s opinion, Porshenko did not break Ukraine’s oligarchic power, but he secured Western support of Ukraine and rebuilt the army which strengthens Ukraine’s national identity. Karatnycky characterizes Poroshenko’s rule as a true beginning transition of Ukraine from authoritarian to democratic government. However, Kartnycky notes the judicial system and established oligarch’ influence continues to obstruct democratic ideals. Further, Russia’s Donbas battles with Ukraine continue through his administration.

Russia’s Donbas battles with Ukraine continue through Poroshenko’s administration.

Finally, we get to the election of Volodymry Zelensky in 2019. Karatnycky sees Zelensky as a pre-war and wartime President. Zelensky’s successful election is shocking considering the author’s assessment of Poroshenko’s successes in transitioning Ukraine to a world recognized democratic rather than authoritarian government. Zelensky, a comic actor, soundly defeats Poroshenko in the election of 2019. Zelensky appears completely out of his element in becoming President of Ukraine. He struggles with political reform and shows an ineptitude in dealing with political infighting. Karatnycky describes Zelensky as “…well-intentioned but inexperienced naïve in his first two years as President. However, as Russia chooses to invade Ukraine, the wartime Zelensky becomes a unifying national leader. His experience as an actor/comedian makes him a master communicator. Zelensky becomes a wartime decision maker that gathers Western support for the defense of his country. Zelensky overcomes his political shortcomings in the face of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Zelensky manages to unite Ukraine against a much larger enemy despite the economic stagnation of the Ukrainian economy.

Volodymry Zelensky (President of Ukraine 2019-?)

It Karatnycky’s opinion, Ukraine will survive Russia’s invasion and will remain a sovereign country. A reader/listener of “Battleground Ukraine” infers Putin will fail because of Russia’s flagging economy and weakening military. The Ukraine war may go on for many more months, but its economic devastation and human deaths will end with Ukraine as a sovereign country, and presumably, a Russia with a different President.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

THE RUSSIAN ECONOMY (A Very Short Introduction)

Author: Richard Connolly

Narration by: John Pruden

Richard Connolly (British author, Associate fellow at the Centre for New American Security (CNAS) in Washington D.C., former director of the Centre for Russian, European and Eurasian Studies at the University of Birmingham.)

Richard Connolly offers a brief and informative overview of Russia’s economic growth from the days of Stalin through today. He explains Russia’s economy has grown into a blend of state control and market demand that became the 20th century’s USSR. The common objective of every Russian leader since the 1917 revolution is stabilization of the country and any territory they rule. From the early days of Lenin and Stalin there is the goal of transitioning Russia from an agrarian lifestyle to an industrial power that could compete with other nations. In the process of that decision and from the spoils of WWII Russia became the USSR.

The goal of industrializing Russia for what became the U.S.S.R. is to create a powerful nation-state, by any means necessary, to compete with and/or dominate other nations. The shortest road for an agrarian nation to become an industrial power is dictatorship which fit the personality of Lenin’s successor, Joseph Stalin.

Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, General Secretary of the Communist Party 1922-1952.)

Stalin is a born martinet. He views Russia’s agrarian workers without concern for human or economic cost to turn their labor to industry with the intent of creating a military/industrial power. He redirects Russia’s people to work for the betterment of the state. At the same time, Stalin transitions farm laborers to industrial workers managed by government apparatchiks. Five-year plans are created by the government. Those who fail to achieve five-year plan goals are punished. Agriculture is forcibly collectivized and controlled by the government. The methodology Stalin uses to industrialize Russia is repeated in countries Russia claims after World War II.

The hardship one hears in traveling to Poland and the Baltics opens one’s eyes to the terrible experience their citizens endure from Stalin’s rule. The revenue from agricultural and mineral production goes to the State for purchase of machinery to industrialize Russia and newly acquired territories after the defeat of Nazi Germany in WWII. Thousands die of starvation because of Stalin’s ambition. Economic independence is not tolerated, either in agriculture or industry. Stalin focuses on steel, coal, and machinery to transform the economy. Living standards of workers is of no concern with goals that must be met. Profitability, consumer needs, and human life are sacrificed with the singular goal of maximizing industrial production.

The Soviet economy advanced because of Stalin’s political goals. Stalin’s goals are state security and survival. Human cost is no concern. Those who opposed Stalin’s goals were either suppressed, tortured, or killed as enemies of the State. Stalin rules for 29 years, from 1924 until his death in 1953. Stalin achieves enormous strategic economic gains by building a heavy-industrial, militarized economy that gave Russia, then the USSR, great-power status. Despite his methodology and the duplicity of Stalin’s early support of Hitler in WWII, Russia became a critical world power with the defeat of Nazi Germany. For that success, the world owes some measure of gratitude for an amoral and inhumane tyrant.

Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971, Secy. of the communist party 1953-1964)

When Khrushchev came to power after Stalin’s death, he shifts Stalin’s model of governance to a more sustainable, technologically oriented system for Russia to remain a superpower. Khrushchev rebalances the Soviet economy in a way that keeps Russia militarily competitive and capable of global engagement. He shifted the economy toward science, technology, and space exploration. One is reminded of Russia’s Sputnik moment. Technology became a core component of economic power. Khrushchev moves Russia toward consumer welfare to illustrate his belief in the superiority of socialism. Connolly suggests Khrushchev began raising the living standards of the Russian people. The Soviet Union became more of an international partner by aiding other countries, selling arms to other countries, and using trade and technical assistance as a geopolitical influencer. Brezhnev solidified the vision of socialism as a stable and predictive governmental system. However, the Russia economy became less dynamic in the modernizing world. In the 1980s, the Russian economy falters.

Yuri Andropov (1982-1984 General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, born in 1914-died in 1984.)

When Brezhnev dies in 1982, Yuri Andropov becomes the General Secretary of the Communist Party. In his short tenure, he revives discipline in governance of Russia by fighting corruption and trying to improve Russia’s economy. Andropov’s tenure is short, approximately 15 months. Andropov wished Mikhail Gorbachev to succeed him, but the Politburo chose Chernenko who only served for 13 months.

Konstantin Chernenko (General Secretary of the Communist Party 1984-1984, born in 1911-died in 1985.)

Chernenko’s successor is Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev transformed the USSR. He ended the Cold War and reduced hostility toward the West. He received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1990. On the one hand he democratized Soviet politics but on the other he unintentionally triggered the collapse of the U.S.S.R. Gorbachev’s replacement is Boris Yeltsin who effectively dismantled Russia’s planned economy and opens Russia to global markets. His short tenure is chaotic, but it creates a foundation that leads to Putin’s reign.

“The Russian Economy” is written before Putin invades Ukraine. Putin reasserts the Russian government’s control over the economy.

Energy, defense, and finance are state controlled. In a sense, Putin returns to something like the rule of Stalin. Putin chooses to reorient Russia toward Asia rather than the United States. Putin rebuilt Russia’s wartime military capabilities. However, Connolly argues Putin fails to diversify or modernize Russia’s economy. He has successfully created a durable, state-centered model of government with geopolitical power, but economic prosperity seems, at best, a faltering work in progress. Connolly believes Russia will be able to withstand pressure from the West with its nuclear capability and economic power. Connolly believes Russia will survive its present semi-isolation. Connolly believes the State will remain the central actor in Russia’s future with (at least a near term) orientation toward Asia rather than the West.

WORLD INIQUITY

One comes away from Trevor Reed’s book with the feeling he tilted at Don Quixote’s windmill. One’s heart goes out to Ukraine and their fight against an implacable Russian President who tilts at a different windmill.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Retribution (A US Marine’s Fight for Justice, from the Russian Gulag to Ukraine’s Front Lines

Author: Trevor Reed, Jim DeFelice

Narration by: Roger Wayne, Joey Reed

Trevor Reed (on the left) is the subject of Retribution. It is co-written with the novelist Jim DeFelice (on the right).

U.S. Marine infantry.

Trevor Reed is a former Marine infantry soldier who was imprisoned for being drunk and disorderly in Russia. He became a victim of Russia’s hostage exchange system. The story of his young life and how he became a marine and a Ukrainian combatant against Russia is explained in “Retribution”. As a strong-willed youth who challenged parental control, he became an athletic wrestling champion in high school. His disciplined physical work ethic made him a 145 lb. highly self-confident young man who decided (contrary to his father’s council as an ex-marine) to enlist in the marine infantry.

The risk of travel to foreign countries.

Reed’s story of being arrested in Russia is a lesson about the risks of traveling to a foreign country that disagrees with America’s form of government. Reed became romantically involved with a young woman in Russia who he had corresponded with after completing his 4-year commitment in the Marines. Alina Tsybulnik, his Russian girlfriend, visited America, became a friend of his family, and invited Trevor to Russia. They became intimate friends.

Alina Tsybulnik and Trevor Reed.

Tsybulnik is enrolled in a Russian college to become an attorney. When Trevor visits her in Russia, they go out on the town. Trevor gets drunk and disorderly and is arrested by the Russian police in 2019. In what is characterized as a gross exaggeration of Trevor’s actions on their night on the town, Trevor is sentenced to prison for nine years in a Russian penal colony. In April 2022, after three years, Trevor is released in a prisoner exchange.

Trevor Reed’s parents.

Reed shows himself to be a tough-minded person who refuses to cooperate with the Russian prison guards’ orders to work while being unfairly imprisoned in a work camp. He is visited by his father who works to have the Biden administration get his son released. Alina Tsybulnik uses her legal experience with the Russian legal system to get Reed released. The corruption and purpose of incarceration in Russia is shown to be political by Reed’s story. Reed explains how even some Russian administrators, not to mention his girlfriend, resist the political ministrations of the system but are unable to change its policies.

Alexei Navalny, a Russian dissident, is sentenced to an Arctic penal colony and is poisoned. He dies in that Arctic colony at the age of 47 in 2024.

The last chapters of Reed’s book recount his effort to get a level of revenge against Russia’s injustice by volunteering in Ukraine’s war against Russia’s invasion. Reed had become a fluent Russian language user because of his intellect, his relationship with Tsybulnik, and his imprisonment. He used that skill to join the Ukrainian resistance. One comes away from Trevor Reed’s book with the feeling he tilted at Don Quixote’s windmill. One’s heart goes out to Ukraine and their fight against an implacable Russian President who tilts at a different windmill.

HOSTAGE NEGOTIATIONS

The disturbing message of “Swap” is that human beings are currency, i.e., nothing more than a dollar bill, a euro, a yen, a pound, a franc, or a renminbi. Like a hot war, the Cold War monetizes human lives.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Swap (A Secret History of the New Cold War)

Author: Drew Hinshaw, Joe Parkinson

Narrated By: Keith Brown

Drew Hinshaw (on the left) is a senior reporter at The Wall Street Journal.

Joe Parkinson is also a reporter at The Wall Street Journal. Both are Pulitzer Prize finalists and nominees.

Human life is viewed in this new Cold War’ era as economic transaction.

“Swap” is a detailed explanation of how human beings are just bargaining chips. Hinshaw and Parkinson argue that the Cold War has been resurrected by Russia. Russia uses accusations, sometimes lies, and unreasonable charges against foreign travelers and native dissidents to gain leverage in a blood sport that convicts, incarcerates, imprisons, or murders alleged internal spies, dissidents, and foreign citizens. The authors of “Swap” have researched the 2024 hostage exchanges between Russia and the U.S. to illustrate how crude and transactional hostage-taking has become in a new Cold War.

Hinshaw and Parkinson note that 24 prisoners and 2 children were swapped in what is called the “Rubik’s Cube” hostage exchange of 2024.

“Rubik’s Cube” is meant to describe the complexity of a 2024′ human exchange of prisoners between the West and Russia. The most publicly known hostage release from Putin’s Russia was Brittney Griner (the WNBA star) who was the first to be released when Paul Whelan (a former U.S. Marine), Trevor Reed (also a U.S. Marine), Evan Gershkovich (a Wall Street Journal reporter), and Alsu Kurmasheva (an American journalist visiting her family in Russia) were also hostages but later released in a complicated exchange between many nations’ leaders. This later group was released through the work of the American State Department during the Biden administration which had been criticized by some because of Griner’s celebrity being more important than others. Whether true or not, Hinshaw and Parkinson explain the political reality of hostage taking and exchange has evolved since the earlier Cold War.

Vadim Krasikov (a Russian assassin convicted in Germany), several Russian spies, smugglers, and hackers were released to Russia in exchange for a mega-swap of Americans after Griner’s exchange. The mega-swap was highly complicated and a dramatic example of what negotiated hostage exchanges really mean in the 21st century.

Paul Whelan (Canadian-born U.S. Marine arrested in Russia in 2018.)

This complicated “Rubik Cube” transaction began in 2018 when Paul Whelan had been jailed and convicted in a Russian court for alleged spying. (Interestingly, Whelan had been dishonorably discharged from the Marines for bad conduct related to larceny in 2008.) Along with Whelan’s arrest, Trevor Reed’s conviction and incarceration was in 2019, Brittney Griner in 2022, and Evan Gershkovich in 2023. Each arrest was for different alleged transgressions which added to the negotiation difficulties.

Evan Gershkovich (American journalist and reporter for The Wall Street Journal.)

Brittney Griner (American professional basketball player.)

It was the Wall Street Journal’s hostage (Evan Gershkovich) and the WNBA player (Brittney Griner) that intensified negotiations and public awareness of hostage exchange. The authors of “Swap” explain why awareness is only the beginning of understanding. Whelan’s twin brother is identified as one of the most relentless advocates for Paul Whelan’s release. Whelan’s entire family became “accidental diplomats” by injecting themselves into the American government’s ponderous efforts to get Paul Whelan released. The family injected themselves into the American government’s process by becoming squeaky wheels in the negotiating offices of the government.

Several different countries participated in a multiple hostage swap after Griner’s release. Germany, UK, France, Netherlands, Poland, Lithuania, and the Czech Republic were persuaded by the U.S. government to exchange a convicted assassin and several alleged Russian cyber operatives and spies to gain release of Whelan, Reed, Kurmasheva, and Gershkovich.

This negotiated human exchange is a complicated transaction that involved many governments’ participation and agreement. It required coordinated release of eight Russian operatives, one of which was a convicted assassin, and seven others, either proven or suspected spies or smugglers, to be exchanged for Russia’s imprisoned hostages. Along with the U.S., Germany agreed to release a convicted assassin, while the UK, France, Netherlands, Poland, Lithuania, and Czech Republic agreed to return several alleged Russian cyber operatives and spies. The releases were coordinated by the CIA and MI6 with the transaction to take place in Turkey. This was an amazing operation that required agreement and coordination by 8 nations to secure an agreement with the President of Russia.

Hostage taking has changed human beings into a commodity like money. War and now hostage release dehumanize society.

DICTATORSHIP

The importance of freedom in book publication and for those who read them is the message Charlie English gives the public in “The CIA Book Club”. It is too bad America’s current President chooses not to read because this book reminds one of how important books are in the world.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The CIA Book Club (The Secret Mission to Win the Cold War with Forbidden Literature)

Author: Charlie English

Narrated By: Michael David Axtell

Charlie English (Author, British non-fiction author, former head of international news at the Guardian.)

“The CIA Book Club” is a reminder of the former USSR and today’s Russian invasion of Ukraine and what is at stake for Ukraine’s citizens that may, once again, come under the repressive return of a dictatorial leader. Putin has adopted many of the same characteristics of Joseph Stalin, a leader who believed in dictatorial control over the media, and isolating or murdering anyone who challenges his leadership. The scale of Putin’s use of gulags, and mass executions is much smaller than Stalin’s but his cultivation of a cadre of followers, rewarded by the power of association and lure of wealth, create a similar dictatorship.

What Charlie English reminds listener/readers of is how Poland suffered under Stalin and what it will mean to Ukrainians when much of their land is taken to settle the Ukrainian war.

Without solid opposition of all Western powers, concession of Ukrainian land seems inevitable. Trump’s waffling opposition to Putin and the fear of nuclear confrontation reduce the likelihood of Russia’s peaceful withdrawal from Ukraine.

Like the repressive actions of the USSR in the Baltics, English explains how brutal Hitler, Stalin, and Stalin’s successors were to Poland even after Stalin’s death.

Strick control over publishing continued after Stalin’s death. Orwell, Koestler, and Solzhenitsyn were banned, and western books were blocked at the border. Polish citizens like Miroslaw Chojecki risked imprisonment for smuggling and/or re-printing forbidden works. The KGB monitored dissidents, writers, and students. English notes that phones were tapped and homes raided. However, a CIA program continued to provide copies of banned books to Polish dissidents. Polish citizens became partners in covert activities to smuggle and re-print books for their countrymen and women. A Solidarity movement against censorship and discrimination is formed by Polish patriots. This reminds one of the resistances one hears when visiting today’s Baltic countries and stories of citizens whose families were jailed, tortured, and sometimes killed during Stalin’s occupation.

Poland, a spectacularly beautiful country.

Poland is an important trade and agricultural producer at the crossroad of Europe. It has no natural land barriers between itself and the great powers on their borders. Its strategic value to European aggressors has made it a victim of a history of foreign occupation. In the 13th, 17th, 18th, and 20th centuries Poland was occupied by Mongols, Prussians, Germans, and Russians. Poland’s diverse population seems to have been unable to create a strong centralized authority that could successfully resist their powerful neighbors who confiscated their riches and occupied their land. Charlie English’s book reminds reader/listeners of what makes Poland a great nation. It is its diversity and its pursuit of intellectual development. Sadly, its geographic location has threatened its existence for millenniums. America is blessed by its geographic location and shows how it could survive as a free democratic nation. Through clandestine operations and support by the CIA, Polish patriots were able to reproduce banned books during the cold war that aided the intellectual growth of Poland despite Stalin’s repression.

America’s current President impedes the influence of freedom in Europe by dismantling surveillance oversight, undermining the EU-U.S. Data privacy framework, and by shutting down the GEC (Global Engagement Center) which is designed to counter foreign disinformation.

Trump’s intent is to save money. The author notes the same thing nearly happened with the CIA book publishing support of Poland when some of America’s leaders tried to cut its funding. The CIA prevailed and the financial support continued.

NO WINNERS

Black America is not liberated by the Civil War. Neither will the Russians or Ukrainians be liberated by whichever side wins. There are no winners. There is only death and destruction as evidenced by the tragedy unfolding in Gaza.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

How to Dodge a Cannon Ball (A Novel)

Author: Denard Dayle

Narrated By: William DeMeritt

Denard Dayle (Author, Jamaican-American writer, graduate of Princeton with an MFA from Columbia University.)

The central character in Denard Dayle’s novel is Anders. Anders is a light skinned Black soldier in the American Civil War. He begins as a Confederate and escapes to become a Union soldier as a Flag carrier. The author’s story is tedious and a mess, but it reflects the many conflicts among Americans fighting in the Civil War. The bizarre happenings in Dayle’s story are meant to be satirical with a bite but with so many twists in ideas about race, nationalism, gender, and the history of the war that one is inclined to put the book down. One may soldier on with a hope to understand Dayle’s point.

America’s Civil War.

After listening to “How to Dodge a Cannonball” for several hours, one gathers Dayle’s point is to show the complexity of America’s Civil War and what it means to be an American. The absurdity of all wars is revealed in America’s Civil War contradictions and hypocrisies. There are many, some of which are uniquely about civil wars, but also about every war.

In fighting a civil war for freedom in America, governments deny freedom to both sides of the conflict.

In fighting a war of conquest like that in Ukraine, both the aggressor and defender nations equally deny freedom to their citizens. Dayle shows race, gender, and nationality make little difference in who loses their freedom when war is declared. Black America is not liberated by the Civil War. Neither will the Russians or Ukrainians be liberated by whichever side wins. There are no winners. There is only death and destruction as evidenced by the tragedy unfolding in Gaza.

Dayle makes his point, but the story becomes too repetitive and tiresome for this listener/reader who quits the book before its ending.

UNJUST CAPITULATION

Both Trump and Putin are wrong in trying to return America and Russia to their past. What one presumes from Nye’s lectures is that a threat of millions of lives being lost from nuclear war will actually result in a gorilla war in territory unjustly ceded to Russia by Ukraine.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Must History Repeat the Great Conflicts of This Century?

Lecturer: Joseph S. Nye Jr.

By: The Great Courses

Joseph Nye Jr. (1937-2025, Distinguished Service Professor Political Scientist at Harvard Kennedy University.)

In listening to Joseph Nye Jr.’s history of “…Great Conflicts…”, one thinks about similarities between leadership of Russia and America today. Both Trump and Putin believe in strong executive leadership and appear to have a political base that allows Putin to exercise dictatorial power and Trump to bypass traditional bureaucratic limitations on government power. Both Putin and Trump believe in their countries moral and economic superiority and are trying to return their nations to the twentieth century. As leaders of their countries, they have influenced media support of their ambitions through influence and the creation of conspiracy-driven narratives.

Joseph Nye’s lectures suggest history is only a guide to the future, not a prediction.

Nye explains circumstances of the present are never exactly the same as the past. Every war of the past is based on complex causes that are never precisely the same. The world wars and the cold war developed as a result of specific government’ diplomatic, operational, and international circumstances. Nye explains why two world wars were about balance of power that changed with WWI and were refined by WWII. The German, Austro-Hungarian, and Ottoman empires collapsed after WWI. With the defeat of Hitler, Nye infers WWII is a failed effort to reestablish the German empire.

Listening to Nye’s view of history, makes one think of Putin’s and Trump’s maneuvering in the 21st century. Both leaders are trying to recreate a balance of power with America strengthening its position and Russia reestablishing its role among the top three powers. What gives weight to that view is Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, China’s wait and see attitude, and Trump’s foolish antagonism toward its traditional western allies in the belief that it strengthens America. Trump seems ignorant of history by failing to recognize America’s power is hugely benefited by its close relationship with Great Britain and North America. To antagonize England, Canada, and Mexico with tariffs and the NATO alliance with complaints about unequal financial support reduces America’s power and influence.

Today, nuclear war is a different circumstance upon which every government leader recognizes as a fundamental change in the principle of “might makes right”.

One sees that Trump’s hostile confrontation with Zelenskyy on television is an expression of America’s leadership fear of nuclear war. Putin threatens nuclear retaliation, but threats are not actions. Putin continues his conventional war against Ukraine and Trump pressures Putin to end the conflict with limited support of weapons for Ukraine and implied willingness to agree to Putin’s demands for annexation of some part of Ukranian territory.

Nye’s lectures do not say history repeats, but he warns it can have similar results without careful analysis and strategic foresight by government leaders.

However, Trump and his advisors appear ignorant of the lessons of history noted by Professor Nye. America and Russia think they have a choice in how the war in Ukraine can be brought to an end that will bring peace. The truth is that peace is only a Hobson’s choice where there is only one option. Trump sees the possibility of millions being killed from a nuclear war. Putin sees the possibility of gaining territory from Ukraine with potential loss of rule as President of Russia. Zelenskyy and Putin have the illusion of choice while the international community and America will likely make the decision.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: