Some of the responses to Russia’s actions in the past two weeks have been slightly panicked, and focused strictly on geo-politics. But the key to the situation is Russia’s economic position – not any ambitions to kick off a new cold (or hot) war.
We shouldn’t be surprised that supposedly resurgent Russian ‘imperialism’ has dealt its first blow in energy-rich central Asia. Russia’s actions are a result of its needs as a petro-economy. Its economic weaknesses led to this attack – not a desire to take over the world. As The Economist has written today:
“Contrary to some excitable first reactions, Russia’s ability to crush the minuscule Georgian army does not make it a superpower, and its aggression in the Caucasus need not mark the start of a new cold war. To put things in perspective, America’s GDP is ten times bigger than Russia’s and it spends at least seven times more on defence.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in