Midweekly Overview
Estimated Reading Time: 4 mins, 52 sec.
Retaliating to Russian Hacking
As a reader of this blog, I assume you already know most of the [so far known] details about Russian hacking scandal.
Without going into too many details, two notable mentions
1) Russia managed to hack into the DHS and Pentagon - this is huge. These institutions must normally be the best protected.
This is quite embarrassing to the US. Time to invest seriously into cyber space. Build proactive cyber force. Just like in the UK.
US is rightly investing a lot into the space force - but if cyber defenses are vulnerable enough for even the pentagon to be hacked, then it is time to get back to basics.
After all, Space force will be the most computing dependent branch of the US military. Taking proactive steps to upgrade cyber capabilities is now vital.
2) Fire eye - a premier cybersecurity company that is supposedly in charge of analyzing IT risks and malicious software was also hacked.
There is clear gap in the market of B2B cyber security software providers.
I expect some entrepreneurs will come up with something to address this gap
Maybe Peter Thiel could assemble a team of cyber security engineers and build something incredible - like he did with Palantir.
Needless to say, Russia has crossed too many lines. Retaliation is in order.
Not ‘‘ engagement ‘‘ or ‘‘reset’’ - none of that pathetic weak nonsense.
Not even usual route of sanctions - that would not suffice as a response for such grave insult.
Proper retaliation. The prestige and prowess of the U.S. has been challenged.
All realpolitik players know that the reflexive honor/ prestige/ prowess of a state matters. A lot.
Just look at the leaked pentagon papers - where the U.S. administration admitted that ‘‘70%’’ of the reasoning for military intervention in Vietnam was for the protection of ‘‘U.S. prestige’’.
Not justifying or debating whether or not Vietnam war was a mistake. Pointing out the importance of world standing and optics.
Before we can proceed with how, let as address the burning question: wouldn’t the U.S. retaliation escalate things further - potentially into an open conflict?
No it would not.
Putin himself is a realpolitik player. He knows that retaliation is in order and he will certainly absorb the blow [with possibly a minor face saving response]
All great players of realpolitik know the importance of the demonstration of state prowess/dominance.
Especially for someone to the east of the Hajnal line [where reflexive honor is instinctively more important] like Putin.
Even Trump knows this.
Recall how the U.S. did not respond to Iran’s missile attack against its Iraq base in January of this year.
This is because the attack was a response for Suleimani’s assassination. U.S. leadership simply understood that Iran has to respond somehow to save face.
So they decided to absorb the blow.
So how do we respond?
Not by targeting their military
Because we don’t know exactly how well they are protected.
What if Russian SVR is doing an excellent job of protecting their Ministry of Defense? Can you imagine the embarrassment of attempting to hack their version of pentagon and failing?
Russians would be gloating.
They would very happily report about our failed attempts.
To get our pentagon hacked and then fail at hacking their corresponding target - double the embarrassment.
Better follow the strategy that has a higher probability of success and that will actually hurt.
A wise under secretary of state once said ‘‘ what if we erased a couple of zeros in the bank accounts of their siloviki leaders?’’
Sounds like an excellent plan.
Virtually all of the SVR and FSB generals are corrupt. A lot of them have secret bank accounts. Attack those and;
1) have the cloak of reasonableness: that the U.S. did not target facilities that could impact the Russian public in their day to day security - instead attacking the actual perpetrators.
2) Inflict actual injury where it hurts.
Russian State Poisoning Opposition Leader Navalny
Bellingcat had a great investigative journalism piece exposing exactly how FSB tracked and most certainly also poisoned Navalny.
To me, this of course was a mere confirmation that the Russian state was behind this.
The very basic motive/capacity questions : who would benefit/who would have the balls to poison a very popular opposition leader with a global profile.
Then there was the revelation from Germany that a new variation of the ‘‘novichok’’ nerve agent was identified in Navalny.
Something that only a state level operation would be capable of re-creating - certainly not a commercial producer acting alone.
Putin’s response was uncharacteristically uncool and too implausible [even for his standards]
In his annual marathon interview he said that Navalny was not worth poisoning.
Yeah right…
This sounds as plausible as a man who just got rejected by a 9/10 at a bar telling his buddy ‘‘well she is a whore anyways. Not really worth it’’
Analogy is not only for humorous purposes : both 9/10 at a bar and Navalny are high-value prizes.
Navalny is definitely worth poisoning [if one has that mentality] .
For starters, he is incredibly popular across the board.
His popularity is based on his anti-corruption big-tent appeal that crosses all ideological, class, gender and age barriers.
Furthermore, given the issue / focus - he never runs out of material in Russia. He has a staying power. His popularity has been remarkable resilient and consistent for at least the past 7 years.
He is also quite nationalistic - unlike other liberal opposition members.
For example the [very liberal] late Boris Nemtsov was too cosmopolitan/western in his lifestyle and values. Too much for an average Russian.
There is no such issue with Navalny.
He is also an excellent organizer and comes up with intelligent maneuvers.
Case in point: his latest ‘‘smart voting’’ ploy - a tactical voting ruse aiming to defeat Putin’s ‘‘United Russia’’ party in elections all across the country
Now, notice how earlier I said Russian state - not Putin specifically.
Even though I am sure ]beyond reasonable doubt] that the state agency was indeed behind the poisoning, it may not have been Putin himself giving the order.
So then… who would do this?
Perhaps someone who would benefit from the constant internal political tensions that would prevent any political reforms.
Let’s backtrack. First off, why would anyone high up [and that person needs to be high up] think that such reforms may have been possible in the nearest future?
It all has to do with Putin’s succession plans.
Putin has a problem. He has no successor that he trusts completely - that he would be willing to give his power to and resign quietly.
His power vertical depends on exactly that - power.
Power only systems don’t like competitors. Where is the guarantee that his successor would not finish him off?
After all, the new leader would not want the shadow of Putin hanging over his head. He would want complete autonomy - and that would give him full deference of those under him.
Putin knows this.
He knows the risk of leaving and giving the power to someone else.
This is why he introduced constitutional changes that would keep him in power until at least 2036 [or so he wishes].
So what might he do instead? How about gradual political reforms and establishing an actual rule of law.
Once Russia could have all that - he could then retire gracefully feeling more secure that his wealth would not be touched arbitrarily. That his successor would not simply toss him into prison.
The very fact that Navalny has offices in almost every corner of Russia [usually opposition HQs in Russia get shut down under various facades], and that he could go on freely challenging United Russia with his smart voting stratagem - these very facts could convince wannabe successors that Putin [by tolerating these transgressions] is slowly moving in the direction of reform.
This poisoning could then create new conflicts and raise the tensions back - where Putin’s hand would be limited.
We don’t have direct evidence for this analysis. But this is the beauty of realpolitik analysis - using empathy and deep knowledge of adversary’s political system to engage in probable scenario analyses.
Also…
This poisoning is great new cause for extra Russian sanctions. Get EU organized [and led by eager and so far highly involved] Germany. Let them inflict significant injury on Russia with new sanctions too.
US Recognizes Moroccan Sovereignty Over Western Sahara
I won’t go into the underlying rationale.
Or whether the move was correct or not.
I will comment on its execution: U.S. did this alone. No other country followed suit.
This is pretty damaging to U.S. standing and soft power prestige in the world.
This is the kinda stuff that Putin does - in process revealing that Russia has no allies willing to follow its directives.
So: should have consulted with at least UK and Israel. Definitely not alone.
Bad look. Can de-legitimize future recognitions - and the value and impact of U.S. acknowledgments in general.
A bit too anti-Russian and neoconnish for my tastes. The last thing we need is a pointless conflict with Russia over things which really don't matter in the long run.