On the assumption that somehow Putin hijacked the proceedings, it seems to me that Francesco makes excellent points. Putin should have pocketed Crimea and  moved on.  The West would have done nothing, proven by the fact that it in fact did nothing.  In the medium- and long-term encouraging SMEs, entrepreneurs, innovation and economic opening in general would be very much in Russia’s interest is beyond doubt.  I think this answers David’s question.  However, in the short term, Putin is vaunting Russia’s “relevance” (in the sense used by Clinton after his disastrous Congressional election defeat) in the contemporary world.  And indeed it is relevant, given the unbelievably feckless behavior of the Europeans and the Americans.  He is not a free market liberal or political democrat.  He is a great Russian nationalist and as such he is operating successfully in a power vacuum.

Asia Times Financial is now live. Linking accurate news, insightful analysis and local knowledge with the ATF China Bond 50 Index, the world's first benchmark cross sector Chinese Bond Indices. Read ATF now. 

Norman A. Bailey

Norman A Bailey is the author of numerous books and articles and recipient of several honorary degrees, medals and awards and two orders of knighthood. He also teaches economic statecraft at The Institute of World Politics and has experience on the staff of the National Security Council at the White House, in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and in business, consulting and finance. He is professor of economics and national security at the National Security Studies Center, University...

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *