Death spirals

Each year, I try to pick the most important story of that year, the one most likely to affect our immediate future. This year, however, I’ve picked two stories. They seem to have little in common but are strangely inseparable, at least to me. Perhaps it’s because they share the same theme — the death spiral of a monster.

The first story involves the war in Ukraine, which started late last February. It was supposed to be a quick mauling of any Ukrainian forces that resisted the Russian invasion. It was anything but. To understand why, we have to imagine a dictator who is among the greatest fuckups in history, and also one of the cruelest, most impulsive, and most vengeful — Vladimir Putin. If you’re wondering what he could have done to earn these distinctions, here’s a record of ineptitude that may challenge your credulity:

  • Putin’s first responsibility was to gather intelligence, and in this he failed utterly. The estimate of Ukraine’s readiness and will to resist missed the mark completely. The estimate of the West’s commitment to Ukraine also erred badly. The West quickly agreed on crushing sanctions that all but crippled Russia’s economy. Then it followed through by providing Ukraine with advanced weapon systems, technical assistance, military intelligence, food, clothing, medical supplies, and infrastructure support. Putin failed to realize there was no way to intercept supply lines without invading NATO nations and triggering a doomsday scenario. In effect, Putin found himself fighting against the entire industrialized world, minus China, India, and Iran.

  • He never bothered to understand the logistics of fighting a war. He had no access to Ukraine’s rail system, so he sent countless military and supply vehicles down Ukraine’s roads, where they stalled and became targets. The glut of traffic was so immense that fuel, munitions, spare parts, and other materiel couldn’t be efficiently moved to troops in forward positions.

  • He put quickly trained — and therefore poorly trained — soldiers in the field. Moreover, he sent far too few of them. Approximately 150,000 to 190,000 Russian soldiers, regulars and irregulars, were in the initial invasion force, facing a country of 44 million people. That’s a ratio of 4 Russian soldiers for every 1,000 Ukrainian inhabitants. Data from modern warfare shows that roughly 20 soldiers for every 1,000 inhabitants are needed to conquer and pacify a hostile population. This explains why Putin has been desperate to find more soldiers. He has hired mercenaries and offered convicts freedom if they agree to fight. He has gone so far as to institute a draft, but this caused such an uproar that he had to give it up.

  • Last April, Russian troops halted their advance on Kyiv. It was the perfect moment for Putin to cut his losses and pretend he had delivered a harsh warning to Ukrainians who dared to collude with NATO. Sadly, he was too proud to accept the rebuke he was dealt. He redeployed Russian forces to the East and South, where many Ukrainians identify with Russian culture. The Russians were brutal in asserting their claims to these regions. Rockets destroyed urban centers and residences. People on the street were indiscriminately executed and consigned to mass graves. Many of the survivors were tortured; women were raped. The new strategy was to demoralize Ukrainians by subjecting them to a barrage of war crimes. The memory of this savagery will evoke Ukrainian hatred for centuries. Even if Russian reverses its record of screwups and losses, it will never pacify a single acre of Ukrainian territory. Russia hoped to avoid sharing a border with a NATO country. Now they will share a border with something far worse, a blood enemy. And if Ukraine is ever in a position to dictate the terms that will end the war, Putin and his surviving generals will certainly face war crimes trials, imprisonment, and execution.

  • He is oblivious to the enormity of his crimes. This winter he has doubled down. He’s sent missile barrages against Ukraine’s infrastructure, depriving Ukrainians of light, warmth, water, and food supplies. He has actually weaponized winter. This strategy will never drive his foe toward capitulation; it will have exactly the opposite effect.

  • He has never had a contingency plan for a long war. After 10 months of fighting, he’s using charity drives to supply soldiers with medicine, sleeping bags, felt boots, woolen socks, mittens, scarves, and body armor. One charity event raised the equivalent of $45 thousand. Contrast this with the $45 billion that Congress recently passed for emergency assistance to Ukraine and NATO allies. The appropriation includes a critical infusion of Patriot anti-ballistic missiles.

The war will end in either of two ways. One, Russia loses in the traditional way — they capitulate and Ukraine dictates terms, which will undoubtedly include Putin’s removal (if he isn’t already dead), loss of the Crimea, and war reparations. Two, Russia loses in the pyrrhic way; that is, they win but pay a staggering price in lives, leadership, prosperity, and reputation. If it’s the second way, it won’t be called “pyrrhic,” because no winning military in world history will have paid such a disastrous price. It will be called a “putinic” (poo-TIN-ic, with two short i’s) victory. It’s amazing to think that the likelihood of a no-win scenario has probably never occurred to Putin.

The second story begins with a mass poisoning, an occurrence that is almost always accidental. A case in point is the poisoning of the Flint River some years ago when lead leached into the Flint, Michigan, water supply. It wasn’t a malicious crime but an instance of greed, arrogance, and gross incompetence, as we so often see in human dealings. Contrast this case with the poisonous lies and misinformation the Republican party and Trump Administration have for years spewed into the American body politic via mass media outlets — newspapers, magazines, radio, television, and an array of Internet social platforms. The climax, of course, was the Big Lie, the outrageous claim that the 2020 Presidential Election was stolen by the Democrats. That lie has been served up daily at every level of government. Invariably, it is garnished with supporting lies. Election observers were let go! Election workers stuffed ballot boxes! Voting machines were reprogrammed! Venezualan software was used to flip Trump votes! Fake ballots were flown in from China! Record numbers of dead people voted! The sum of the votes exceeded the number of voters!

Have no doubt that a repeated cocktail of lies can be just as destructive to a body politic as chemical poisons are to flesh and blood. Add to this another fact, that most Americans glory in jingoistic horseshit: America is exceptional, a shining city on a hill, God’s chosen nation, the savior of democracies, the last best hope of earth. We are disposed to love anyone who tells us repeatedly how special we are, which leaves us open to the manipulations of political flimflam artists. How hurtful it was to be told our star had dimmed. How restorative to hear our greatness could be made complete again. How thrilling to know a person is among us who could accomplish this mission. How infuriating to learn he had been cheated out of that opportunity! Thus the vile poison saturated our discourse.

All through 2021, the Trump-induced delirium rolled on. Denial of Biden’s election swept the South and Midwest, while the swing states were incubating sworn enemies of free and fair elections. Hundreds of candidates were ready to file for the 2022 midterms and usher in one-party rule. Meanwhile, the Democrats wallowed in helplessness. Because two of their number were closet Republicans, Democratic control of the Senate was an illusion. The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act was on the Senate floor in January, 2022. If it had become federal law, it would have superseded any state law that sought to thwart minority access to the ballot. Sadly, it lacked Republican support. The Democrats didn’t even have enough votes to block a Republican filibuster.

The outlook for the 2022 midterms was further dimmed by a disengaged Department of Justice. By the first anniversary of the January 6ᵗʰ riot, the department had arrested 700 rioters and was pursuing hundreds more, but it had done virtually no investigating of the role Trump and his colleagues played in organizing or inciting the riot. If DoJ priorities had been prudent, if the big fish had been its primary target, it would have known in just months that Trump had been assured the election was fair; it would have had all the information needed to lay bare the conspiracy of liars and cynical cowards at the heart of America’s poisoning.

In the face of DoJ inaction, Nancy Pelosi called for a national commission to investigate the origins of the January 6ᵗʰ riot. The idea passed the House but failed in the Senate, where the Republicans threatened to filibuster. Pelosi, undaunted, proposed that a House Select Committee, a so-called “January 6ᵗʰ Committee,” do the investigation. Kevin McCarthy, her counterpart, insisted that five representatives of his choosing be seated on the committee. Three of these were laughably biased, so Pelosi picked two even-handed Republicans to replaced them. The committee was approved by all the House Democrats and 38 Republicans. It held its first meeting on July 27, 2021, with the testimony of four Capitol police officers. By the end of the year, it had interviewed more than 300 witnesses, obtained more than 35,000 documents, and gone far toward exposing the subversion that lay behind the riot. Unfortunately, their findings hadn’t been woven into a coherent narrative and presented in full public view.

When 2022 began, Democrats were in white-knuckled dread of the changes the year would bring. They wondered, is this the year the Trumpists strangle democracy? In their despair, they failed to notice a sea change. Immediately after Russia invaded Ukraine, Trump labeled Putin a genius, adding, “He’s taking over a country for $2 worth [!] of sanctions. I’d say that’s pretty smart.” In referring to the loss of life, he couldn’t avoid trotting out his Big Lie. “If our election wasn’t rigged, you would’ve had nobody dead.” Stunning. He delivered a trifecta of stupidity, mendacity, and conceit in just a few sentences, showing the world once again how loathsome he was.

Then came May, a month of reckoning for Trump. The preceding December, he had phoned Georgia’s Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, who was busy looking into charges of voter fraud. Trump asked Raffensperger to “find” the 11,780 votes he needed to top Biden’s Georgia vote count, plainly an attempt to tamper with the election. As May arrived, Fani Willis, the Fulton County District Attorney, struck back at Trump. She requested that the county’s chief judge create a grand jury to determine if Trump’s behavior was criminal. The grand jury’s findings will be reported soon.

Later in the month, the first critical Republican primaries of 2022 were held. In Idaho, the governor beat a Trump-favored challenger. In North Carolina, Trump tried to save a congressman hip-deep in scandals but to no avail. In Pennsylvania, Trump went all out for Mehmet Oz, the charlatan doctor. Oz survived but with a dubious road ahead. The Georgia primary was the most bitter pill of all. Trump had a score to settle with Brian Kemp, the governor, who was up for reelection. Months before, Kemp had ignored Trump’s plea to replace Biden’s slate of electors with his own. Even more galling, Brad Raffensperger was trying to be reelected as Secretary of State. To Trump’s great chagrin, both men won easily.

In June, the January 6ᵗʰ Committee began broadcasting its hearings on live television. For the first time, the post-election misdeeds of ex-President Trump sank deeply into the public consciousness. Here is what the committee revealed about him over the course of ten televised sessions:

  • Despite the loss of dozens of election-related lawsuits and the assurance of government officials that the election was fair, he refused to concede. He thus failed his Constitutional obligation to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

  • He asked DoJ officials to tell lies that would help his attempt to overturn the election.

  • He pressured state officials and legislators to change the results of their state elections.

  • He oversaw a plan to obtain false electoral certificates and send them to Congress and the National Archives.

  • He asked members of Congress to object to valid slates of electors from several states.

  • In federal court, he stated that false information was valid.

  • He brought supporters to Washington, DC on January 6ᵗʰ, instructing them to “take back” their country. In speaking to them at the Ellipse, he further provoked them, knowing that some of them were armed.

  • He sent a tweet that publicly condemned Vice President Pence while the rioting was underway.

  • While watching the rioting on television over a period of hours, he refused repeated requests to tell the rioters to disperse and leave the Capitol.

  • He had the authority and responsibility to call the National Guard into the District of Columbia but failed to do so.

As Trump was marinating in the televised testimony, August rolled around. On the 8ᵗʰ, a team of FBI agents entered Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida home, with a search warrant. They were looking for documents, many of them classified, that Trump had taken when he left the presidency and not turned over to the National Archives, as required by the Presidential Records Act. The FBI came away with over 100 classified documents, some of which reportedly contained secrets about nuclear weapons. This disclosure raised the question of whether Trump had violated the Espionage Act.

Later that month, Letitia James, the New York District Attorney, filed a civil fraud lawsuit against Trump and his three oldest children. In a news conference, she accused them of an “astounding” pattern of financial fraud. She claimed Trump had egregiously inflated his worth on financial statements to deceive lenders and insurers into offering beneficial terms. She wants the Trump Organization to give back $250 million of the benefits and be banned from buying commercial real estate in the state for 5 years.

On November 8ᵗʰ, Election Day, three questions hung in the air: how much would high inflation hurt Democrats? how much would the end of the Roe v. Wade era hurt Republicans? how much value would a Trump endorsement carry? Exit polls showed that worries about inflation hurt Democrats somewhat more than pro-abortion sentiment helped them. One issue pretty much offset the other. What gave Democrats the edge was concern about Trump’s political clout, especially among independent voters. They favored Democrats by a small margin, a considerable departure from their voting in the last four midterms. Generally, they favor the party not in power by double digits.

In mid-November, Attorney General Merrick Garland made a long overdue announcement, the appointment of a Justice Department prosecutor, Jack Smith, to oversee two criminal investigations. The first was to determine whether “any person or entity unlawfully interfered with the transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021.” The second was to continue the investigation of the documents found at Mar-a-Lago and “the possible obstruction of that investigation.” Garland’s announcement led me to a couple of conclusions. The work of the January 6ᵗʰ Committee had embarrassed Garland and forced his hand. I have no idea where we’d be today if the committee had never been created. What’s more significant, Smith’s work will inevitably end in criminal indictments. Anything less, and the uproar will be volcanic.

Recently, the January 6ᵗʰ Committee issued its final report. It asks the DoJ to look into at least four of its charges against Trump and to bar him from holding office again. The committee is in the process of turning all its evidence over to Jack Smith.

I expect Trump’s fortunes to decline even more rapidly in 2023. I see no path for him to win the presidential nomination in 2024, nor do I see him as a third party candidate. Either prison or political banishment will bar the way.

All the world’s a lab

world_bombShakespeare wrote that all the world’s a stage. What else would you expect from an actor and dramatist? I take an analytical perspective. I say that all the world’s a lab. Just take a look around—there are real-life lab experiments going on everywhere. They’re telling us who we are and what our future is likely to be. I know that sometimes the data can be ugly and difficult to take in, but hey, don’t we owe ourselves a good look? So, steel yourself. I want to look at three of these experiments.

The first one involves the wars and skirmishes between Israel and the Palestinians. Here we have two groups of aggrieved people, each blocking the other’s path to happiness. The question posed in this experiment is, Will they ever find a modus vivendi, or will mutual hatred and bull-headed stupidity doom them to perpetual bloodshed? More than six decades into the experiment, it’s looking grim. The Israelis, for their part, abuse the rights of Palestinians who live in Israel proper and continue to appropriate land in the West Bank for new settlements. Israel no longer occupies Gaza; Hamas, a terrorist organization, governs. Even so, control of the territory remains with Israel: Gaza is fenced in, and Israel patrols the coast. Israel controls all but one of the exit points (the southern one to Egypt), so they can in effect turn Gaza’s commerce with the world on and off as one turns a faucet on and off.

That’s not to say there isn’t a good reason to fence in Gaza. If the population was at liberty to move about freely, some would surely cross the border and murder Israeli civilians. In fact, tunnels have been dug under the border, and they are used for just that purpose. The animus of the Gaza Palestinians is so intense that they are willing to endure a hundred times the number of deaths they inflict on Israel. When a cease-fire was called in the current conflict, mere hours passed before Hamas renewed its rocket attacks and began a new day of unbalanced death and destruction. This is surely mental illness on a mass scale, yet Fatah, the Palestinian party that controls politics in the West Bank, agreed last April to form a unity government with Hamas! Is it any wonder that Israel walked out of the latest round of peace talks?

America advertises itself as a “fair broker” in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, but we also declare ourselves to be the unswerving friend of Israel. These two positions needn’t be inconsistent—not if we are the kind of partner that speaks up when a friend does something self-destructive. But when have we said, “Stop discriminating against Palestinians; we don’t befriend nations that grant civil rights based on religion or ethnicity”? Or, “Stop building new settlements in the West Bank, or we’ll share no more Iron Dome technology with you”? That’s not the American way. We let our fiends create a mess and then drag us into it.

The second experiment is about pride, power, and humiliation. It poses the question, When a nation of great power fragments and loses much of its dominance, does it integrate peacefully into the new order, or does it become spiteful and threatening? No, I’m not referring to Germany after WWI; that’s a similar experiment, but not current. I’m referring to the former Soviet Union, now Russia. Under its autocratic and popular leader, Vladimir Putin, it’s been bullying states that it formerly controlled. The one most prominently in the news is Ukraine, which wants closer ties to Europe and complete self-determination. Putin is determined to undermine the Westernization of Ukraine by any means, even if it means abetting a proxy war between Ukraine and pro-Russian separatists.

America, of course, is put off by Putin’s saber-rattling—he has already seized Crimea from Ukraine—and favors a path of self-determination for the Ukrainian people. We’re also concerned that Putin may try the same tricks with other nations that were once part of the Soviet Union. Not wanting to go to war, we’ve appealed to our European allies to impose economic sanctions on Russia to get them to back off. The Europeans, however, attach more importance to Russian gas and oil than to freedom on their eastern frontier. They aren’t prepared to go beyond a hand slap. In this experiment, it’s the Europeans who are the friends we won’t criticize. (How satisfying it would be if Obama went to a European summit and said, “Your nations are well-respected around the world. Your citizens are well off, and their freedom is under no threat. You represent a huge political and economic bloc. Now lead, damn you, lead!” Dream on.)

We now see that the pro-Russian separatists are much like the Hamas leadership. They both possess advanced weapons—weapons given to them by nations with dangerous agendas—and they use them indiscriminately. As expected, neither the separatists nor the Russians are remorseful. In fact, it’s now the season for wild lies and delusions. The other day, I watched a series of Rooski-on-the-street interviews that focused on the destruction of MH Flight 17. When asked to speculate about the source of the missile, quite a few thought it was the Ukrainian military. Two thought they staged it with help from America. “There were Americans on that flight,” the interviewer said. “Why would Americans kill their own?” “Americans are cruel if they want something,” was the answer.

The third experiment is playing out in Syria and Iraq. Here we find numerous violent factions, large and small. Most of them despise the others and are ready to use any weapons or methods available to eliminate them. Not surprisingly, the faction that’s the most vicious and well-supplied dominates the rest. It calls itself ISIS, or ISIL. The question posed by this experiment is not, Will these madmen be able to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria or the Maliki government in Iraq? These outcomes are so improbable that the question isn’t worth posing. A better question is, Will ISIS be able to establish itself permanently as a nation—or, as it prefers, a “caliphate”—and become an unmolested exporter of terrorism? If so, they would likely pose a greater threat to world peace than Al-Kaeda did when it was well settled in Afghanistan.

Of course, that isn’t all that’s happening on Laboratory Earth, but those are certainly some of the highlights. How do you feel about them? I want to toss away my clipboard and notes, tear off my lab coat, and run into the streets with some Paul Revere-like message. That or just look away.