Tom Cooper’s Criticism of the Ukraine Military — Let’s Factor In Russia’s Oil Revenues
Will Russia’s economy collapse in the near term? Are the widespread predictions accurate? After 3 years I’m not so sure.
Russia’s continued oil and gas export revenues — over $120 billion a year — provide sufficient resources to sustain a prolonged conflict. This economic reality means Ukraine faces the prospect of ultimate defeat through front-line attrition, unless it takes decisive action on two fronts: maximizing its military leadership capabilities and ensuring every soldier receives training to reach their full combat potential.
That’s Tom Cooper’s argument, which I will augment.
I’ve been subscribed to Tom Cooper’s blog Sarcastosaurus for about a year. The video above is a good introduction to his reasoning. However, only a small part of his blog is spent criticizing Ukraine’s leadership. (If you want deep analysis of the war you should check it out).
Tom argues that Ukraine needs consistent high quality training for every soldier who signs up, plus those already serving. Ukraine’s political leadership and military needs more structure and better accountability. Self-criticism among the military should be encouraged. Instead, only good news is allowed.
In his view, Zelensky and the top commanders only send troops to wherever there’s a problem. They’re always putting out fires. There’s no long-term plan to organize Ukraine’s military in an all-out effort to remove Russia from Ukraine.
He calls some leaders at the top corrupt. He points out war profiting.
As for Ukraine’s success in holding Russia back. He attributes that to the heroic efforts of small units on the front line. They succeed in spite of mismanagement up top.
I’m going to continue assuming you’ve watched the video above or read his blog.
What one thing, if removed, halts an army, navy and air force from moving forward (or backwards)? OIL.
A military that doesn’t have diesel, gasoline and jet-fuel stops. Every time. All the time.
Oil is the missing part of Tom’s argument. Oil is what gives Russia a winning hand. So Russia can fight dumb. Ukraine doesn’t have oil. It must fight smart.
When you accept that Russia has the oil and gas to pay for a forever war AND lure other nations into appeasing Russia in the hope of lower gas prices, you are faced with a hard question — is there room for error, for poor management?
I don’t know what Tom Cooper thinks, but my read of World War II is that U.S. Oil ultimately won it. If Germany had taken control of the Baku oil fields first, we might be speaking German.
At the start of the war German manufacturing ran on coal. I bet there was a critic like Tom Cooper saying, “With coal we can build all the tanks we want but we can’t drive them without diesel (oil).” Germany knew it was short on oil but expected it could squeeze enough “synthetic oil” out of coal to win the war.
I’m not a military historian, but that’s my sense of it. It could not.
Except for oil, Russia and Ukraine have similar economies. Mostly agriculture and mining (resources). It’s as if Putin woke up in February 2022 and decided he’d spend all the oil revenues on conquering Ukraine. (How much does the average Russian see of that oil money anyway?!)
Russia produces enough coal and oil to push into Ukraine indefinitely. Russia collects ~$120 billion from selling oil on the global market. That’s three times the whole export revenues of Ukraine!
Russia has the money to buy/build more weapons and ammo and money to lure poor Russians, North Koreans and Chinese men into fighting.
For the seller (Russia) The great thing about oil is that SOMEONE WILL ALWAYS BUY IT. No one’s morals survive a sub-freezing winter or blistering heat wave. You simply cannot sanction oil. It will always find a way through sanctions. Always. All OIL ends up sold. Every time. All the time.
Put crudely, as some do, The U.S. and Europe are funding Russia’s war. They just buy the oil and gas indirectly through manufactured goods built everywhere but Russia. Those goods are manufactured using Russian oil and gas. The West allows Ukraine to destroy the refineries that Russia uses for internal consumption, but not the oil infrastructure feeding it to the world.
For example, Russia sells China oil and gas. China does the dirty work of refining materials or building commodity parts for European factories. European “factories” assemble the final products. Corporations that do more advertising and distribution, than manufacturing, sell them. The money goes back to China which uses it to buy more Russian oil and gas.
Real sanctions could end the war tomorrow. If Europe identified “black goods” made with Russian oil, like “blood diamonds” mined by slaves, Russia WOULD indeed experience a financial crisis.
I never see this discussed by the Kyiv Post, Professor Gerdes, Jake Broe, etc. Most pro-Ukraine media tells the same now-tired story. Ukraine is damaging air craft thousands of miles away; some European country is sending a box of weapons or money, Ukraine has sabotaged this or that. Some Russian did unspeakable acts to fellow Russians or Ukrainians. Evil Russians!
One of the favorite motifs of the pro-Ukraine media is the decline in Russian tanks. We can watch Covert Cabal and rest satisfied that soon Russia won’t have enough tanks to fight with.
The problem with that is no one is using tanks much anymore. Not Russia, Ukraine or Israel! The U.S. sent M1 Abrams. They either broke down, were destroyed or captured for the Red Square museum. These commentators know that. Why continue talking about tanks?
The war is in the air with drones or on the ground with soldiers trying to outrun them on motorbikes. Ukraine might be more effective, but by how much? (Again, we don’t have the data for critical analysis).
One might say, “great, so oil isn’t a big advantage.”
Except all supply lines run on oil — the trucks, the trains, the ships, the planes!
Every time Ukraine flies an F-16 it must sell some corn or seed oils (top exports) to buy jet-fuel. If the world has an oversupply of either of those Ukraine ends up flying F-16s at a much higher cost than Russia flies its Mig-29s using its own refined fuel.
Russia doesn’t import oil for the war; Ukraine must.
Put bluntly, Ukraine is fighting based on uncertain export revenues, the current political calculations of its neighbors (Europeans) and charity.
To be fair, the leadership of Ukraine understands that.
It would probably answer Tom that yes, it would be nice to have a well structured and run military. But Ukraine can never beat Russia that way. The only way to beat Russia is to make Russia’s internal economic and social pain so great that Russia removes its tentacles.
I agreed with that. Argued it for the first couple of years. I’m not sure anymore.
Russia doesn’t have to take much territory to wear down the resilience of Ukrainians — if it can do it for the next 10 years say.
Based on the past year, Russia is spending $12 billion a month to capture 42 square kilometers of more territory. Never mind that much of that land probably cost less than $40,000 on the open market pre 2022!
What’s important for Russia is the sum of all that land. What’s Crimea worth? It’s not a question of dollars-per-hectare.
The crucial thing of that chart is that Putin can argue that whatever the cost, Russia IS getting something for its investment. Even if the war stops today, if Russia get final recognition of owning Crimea it would have spent $400 billion for territory easily worth $100 billion on non-geopolitical valuations alone. Not bad for a one-of-a-kind property!
But what if Putin can’t claim any return on investment? What if, instead of an average of 500 sq kilometers every month Russia gains nothing. Month after month. What then? 500 sq kilometers might be a horrible investment at $12 billion, but at least that’s something compared to an investment of $12 billion for NOTHING.
The benefit of Ukraine building the military Tom describes is that it can put Russia in the psychological position of feeling impotent (and we know how important virility is to Putin). How many Russians would want to continue the war with no progress?
If Ukraine adopted an efficient military structure that prevented Russia from taking more territory the psychological effects would be intense.
Then there’s this question. Is Ukraine fighting an “existential war.” Do most Ukrainians feel that? If they do, can they trust the West to export enough energy to Ukraine? To wear down the Russian government to the point that it withdraws from Ukraine?
I say this very sadly, and don’t want to say it — I no longer see that happening. When the war began I believed the West would do whatever it took to remove Putin and put Russia back into a subservient position.
I don’t believe it anymore because — did you guess? — OIL! The West is simply too undisciplined and craven to do what it takes (real boycott).
Whatever losses the U.S. oil service companies took, whatever losses the airplane leasing companies suffered, etc., after 3 years they’re entering a period of written-off and forgotten.
The world wants Russian oil. And it wants it as cheaply as possible. Not just China and India anymore. Everyone. Especially Europe.
“Wants” is misleading. EUROPE MUST HAVE IT. Natural Gas, like every other fossil fuel, is a finite resource. The U.S. stepped in to keep the gas flowing in Europe. Yet just as the U.S. is now abandoning aid to Ukraine it will cut back on LNG to Europe. (At least, that’s my prediction).
If the above is true, then Ukraine MUST stop Russia from gaining more territory. It must run the most organized and efficient military in the world. It must value failures, worship self-criticism, make sure every soldier is trained to the maximum of his or her potential.
It’s hard to put this into words but I feel Ukrainians are already preparing themselves for a compromise. Or is it being sold to them!? A world where a ceasefire will be arranged, the front line accepted (just enough territory given back to Ukraine for it to save face).
Putin will die. There will be a new Russian government. A new Ukrainian government. There will be some apologies. Olive branches. New oligarchs, same shit.
To those who believe, as Tom does, that Ukraine is fighting an existential war his criticisms cannot be ignored. His anger, I believe, is funneled by his contacts in Ukraine. Those who believe it IS an existential war.
Does Zelensky really represent the will of Ukrainians? Most yes. But I doubt to those who made the ultimate sacrifice or who have signed up to potentially do so.
I see a Ukraine that is no longer on the same page. How can Zelensky take the side of Israel over Iran when Iran suffered a similar fate to Ukrainians. How can Ukraine get into an economic war with Russia it can’t possibly win on its own, and relies on the whims of others?
### Other Thought Outlines ###
- The West is consumed with domestic battles between nationalists and liberals.
- Nationalists who believe might makes right are now lining up behind Russia. They consider themselves realists.
- Russia has the resources to fight Ukraine indefinitely.
- Ukraine’s plan, seems to be, weaken Russia economically, socially and militarily to the point that it withdraws from Ukraine.
- Ukraine focuses on cutting edge technologies to destroy the war machine within Russia, not on the front line.
- Ukraine defends the front line with a ever changing patchwork of units with varying levels of training managed by central command — which is not a meritocracy.
- Ukraine has developed a culture of hiding bad news.
- As long as Russia keeps taking some territory for its investment is can psychologically continue the war.
- Therefore, a Ukraine military that is run inefficiently and can’t stop Russia from taking territory whatever it takes (because Russia has the oil revenues to continue doing so) will ultimately lead to a psychological collapse in Ukraine.
- What defines “Ukraine”? That will determine the outcome. If it’s territorial integrity then I believe Tom is right, Ukraine has to embrace some hard facts and adjust accordingly.
###
- Russia keeping attacking using oil money.
- Ukraine fights an economic war, believing its defense “investments” will prosper whether Ukraine gets back all its territory or only some of it.
- Ukraine keeps loosing slowly on the front line because that isn’t its focus.
- Ultimately, the Ukraine government loses the support of its citizens.
- But the Ukrainian elite wins in the end anyway. Politicians and others own stakes in many of the weapons manufacturing industries or buy up Ukrainian businesses and farms bankrupted by the war.
