Putin’s Energy Weapon vs European Resolve

We’re already witnessing a Republican backlash against maintaining our level of military and other aid to Ukraine as it defies the Russian invasion. There is little thought to the ramifications of appeasement, the encouragement to China to invade Taiwan, the message to Putin that his desire to reconfigure Russia with a similar territorial spread as in the Soviet era is achievable if the US and Europe can be marginalized. This truly incentivizes Russian spymasters to amp up their election interference in the US. If the US pulls back its support of Ukraine, that does not give us shelter from a potential nuclear storm. We may witness Russia’s and China’s quest for territorial expansion begin to mirror Hitler’s pre-WWII approach to regional annexation. Eventually, Hitler had to be stopped… but only after significant German conquest. WWII with nuclear weapons is particularly scary. But eventually Putin and Xi would have to be stopped too.

Europe alone cannot provide enough military aid to allow Ukraine to oust Russia from its lands. While the United States is suffering from inflationary pressures stemming from higher fuel and food shortages – hence the drivers of much higher prices – what we face is nothing compared to what Europe faces from an expected cold winter with massive shortages of natural gas for home heating. While the United States is estimated to face a winter-to-winter increase of around 20% in the cost of natural gas/electricity for heating (propane is largely unchanged), enough to outrage a lot of voters, Europe’s comparable costs, according to the November 26th The Economist, are more than double ours.

Before the Ukraine war, Russia supplied 40-50% of Europe’s natural gas supply, and as pipelines are mysteriously cut and Europeans seek alternative sources, natural gas and motor fuel are commodities that are skyrocketing across the Atlantic. In Ukraine, there are doubts that many parts of the county will have any sustainable heat at all, prompting officials to begin to move people to areas where they believe heat can be provided.

Vladimir Putin miscalculated in invading Ukraine. Yet, like China’s Xi or our own Trump, he prefers to double down rather than admit defeat. While I do not believe he is ready to resort to the provocative use of nuclear weapons, there is one weapon that his is clearly using in an effort to sow dissention among Europeans, where isolationist candidates have recently been elected (like the new right-wing PM in Italy): energy. If he can price Europeans out of a comfortable winter, even with government subsidies such as those provided in Germany, he just might persuade Europe that supporting Ukraine just isn’t worth it. Without Russian natural gas, particularly given NATO sanctions against his fossil fuel exports, global prices for such fuels will remain high, and given the difficulty of getting natural gas to Europe without those pipelines, even higher in Europe.

But that weapon has a severe lethal side. In winter, especially when temperatures plunge, the deaths rates in Europe climb too. And experts are predicting, even with a rough estimate before the actual temperature and mortality rates can be measured, that the number of additional EU and UK deaths from the cutback electricity and natural gas heating is very likely to exceed the Ukrainian losses from Russian attacks. Further, this energy rift – where the US faces lower costs and no loss in availability for winter energy demands but is still politically exercised by “inflation” under an unpopular President – just might put a new strain on our Atlantic alliance.

The Economist (November 26th) put it this way: “Our data journalists set themselves a difficult question: how many people is this weapon likely to kill outside Ukraine? The answer they came up with was alarming. Although heatwaves get more press, cold temperatures are usually deadlier than hot ones. To estimate the relationship between energy costs and deaths, we built a statistical model that predicts how many people die per winter week in each of 226 European regions. This model found that a 10% rise in electricity prices is associated with a 0.6% increase in deaths, concentrated among the elderly and infirm…

“Europe faces a crisis of energy and geopolitics that will weaken it—and could threaten its global position. If you ask Europe’s friends around the world what they think of the old continent’s prospects they often respond with two emotions. One is admiration. In the struggle to help Ukraine and resist Russian aggression, Europe has displayed unity, grit and a principled willingness to bear enormous costs. But the second is alarm. A brutal economic squeeze will pose a test of Europe’s resilience in 2023 and beyond. There is a growing fear that the recasting of the global energy system, American economic populism and geopolitical rifts threaten the long-run competitiveness of all European countries, Britain included. The worry is not just about the continent’s prosperity; the health of the transatlantic alliance is at risk, too.”

What might trigger European wrath against supporting Ukraine, handing Putin the divisive issue he needs to undercut NATO’s resolve, is how many Europeans will either sicken or die from the cold resulting from this energy shortage. The Economist continues: “To win his war in Ukraine, Vladimir Putin needs the West to stop supporting his adversary… These costs pale in comparison with the horror Ukrainians have endured. But they still matter, because the colder the temperatures people experience, the more likely they are to die. And if the historical relationships between mortality, weather and energy costs continue to apply—which they may not, given how high current prices are—the death toll from Mr Putin’s ‘energy weapon’ could exceed the number of soldiers who have died so far in combat.”

These are ugly numbers and perhaps our GOP backlash will moderate. Perhaps the Europeans are stoic enough to stay the course in Ukraine. And perhaps Putin will be forced to find a path to a peaceful solution. Perhaps.

I’m Peter Dekom, and I am watching the destructive power of growing nationalistic populism paralleling the rise of brutal autocrats ready to take advantage of our desire to maintain our quality of life… even if that means betraying our allies in a truly just defense of their homeland.