This is the first in a short series that discusses recent events as they relate to the analysis developed in The Accidental Superpower. Each of these developments — and dozens more — are symptoms of an underlying change the global order.
Part 1: Shale and the Breakdowns to Come
The Russian economy is a mess. The ruble keeps plumbing new lows, lending across the country has all but stopped, sanctions (and counter-sanctions) are raising the specter of Soviet-style goods shortages, and even the Russian government now predicts 2016 will bring with it the worst recession since at least 1998.
Many — rightly — see the economic carnage being wrought in Russia as an outcome of the Putin government’s adventures in Ukraine and subsequent economic sanctions against Moscow. But that is only part of the story.
In Russia the core issue isn’t so much Ukraine as it is shale. U.S. energy output has skyrocketed and North America has already achieved functional energy independence. The consequent shockwaves through global energy markets are hiving what used to be the largest importing market — the United States — off of the global market. One consequence among many is collapse in oil prices. Russia has never — in any age — managed to maintain a strong economic structure without robust commodity export income. The ruble crash is still only in the very early stages. Cascading defaults are now inevitable.
Nor will the carnage be short lived. U.S. shale is – somewhat unbelievably – still in its infancy. The merging of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technologies is really only a decade old and technological improvement is only now reaching critical mass. As of December 2015 full-cycle break-even costs in the three main U.S. shale oil basins — Bakken, Permian and Eagleford — are for the most part below $45 a barrel. Stunning new technologies are being developed, bundled into packages, and deployed as companies seek to find ways to produce more from fewer wells to save money.
And “full-cycle cost” is no longer a good measure of the total cost to drill a well as it includes everything from the drilling rights to the cleanup. As lower energy prices force consolidation, the remaining U.S. shale operators will acquire the single most expensive aspect of their operations — those drilling rights — at steep discounts. The dizzy year-on-year expansion in U.S. oil output is slowing, but it shows few signs of reversing.
Base Week: September 30, 2005
More broadly, there is not a single oil producer anywhere in the world that has budgeted for an oil price below $50, with most — and most notably, Russia, Iran and Venezuela — requiring prices to be roughly double their current level. Many of these countries’ spending is so high because they have come to rely on petrodollars to fund social programs or military funding that stabilizes their political systems. While it may take some time, civil breakdowns and economic meltdowns are the new normal for a vast raft of commodity-based countries
The Iranian nuclear deal is moving forward as President Obama just recently secured the last vote necessary to prevent the US legislature from blocking the agreement. This agreement gives Iran some significant concessions regarding uranium enrichment and there is considerable hand-wringing in the United States over Iran’s nuclear potential.
But the truth is that I find it unlikely that Iran actually wants a bomb. Should Iran nuclearize, it would encourage Iran’s regional rivals to follow suit. As Iran is clearly the region’s superior conventional power, all nuclearization would do is neutralize its current advantage.
So if nukes don’t serve Iran’s long-term strategic needs, why bother? It’s less about the nuclear weapon and more about the nuclear program.
Having a nuclear program allows Iran to sue for terms with the US (and to a lesser degree, with Israel). And it looks like the strategy is paying off. A degree of collaboration between Washington and Tehran is in both powers’ best interest. But the Iranian nuclear deal is really a product of Iran’s vulnerability and this deal presents an opportunity to lessen that vulnerability and prepare for the next phase of the American empire.
Iran’s leverage in the global system was the result of its ability to threaten the most important oil producing region in the world. But the shale revolution is bringing an end to the era of U.S. preoccupation with oil — in the Middle East or elsewhere.
This geopolitical shift not only eliminates Iran’s leverage, but it also becomes vulnerable as so much of its economy is dependent upon maritime exports of oil. Moreover, as the U.S. withdrawal accelerates, Iran finds itself overextended – not against an easily-distracted America.
Instead Iran faces an awkwardly consolidating Iraq, an awakening Turkish giant, a frightened but focused Israel, a battle hardened Pakistan, a desperately violent Russia and a Saudi Arabia who is willing to write any check if it will weaken Iran.
The question — as in many things — is timing.
Americans haven’t yet internalized that North America’s dependence upon foreign oil is down by roughly two-thirds from what it was seven years ago, and that by 2017 that dependence will be approaching net zero. The speed at which the region is becoming irrelevant to U.S. interests will at some point be matched with a tidal shift in American policy in the region. In the latter half of 2015, therefore, we’re in this odd geopolitical moment where the U.S. doesn’t care all that much — but it does not quite yet not care at all. For Iran this means that the window to extract concessions is very, very small. If the current nuclear deal does not go through for whatever reason, the next round of talks will be with a United States that is largely immune to whatever Iran can throw at it.
Iran’s regional rivals both fear this development and are hoping/trying to reshape the regional geopolitic to create an American-style containment of Iran…without the Americans.
KEY POINTS
Israel is playing the emotional card to try to persuade Americans that their Middle East policy should be all-Israel, all the time. The strategy obviously didn’t fly with the Obama administration, and the groundswell of American public support Israel was hoping for just hasn’t manifested. And so Israel has had little choice but to reach out to allies old and new, most notably Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
Turkey thought it could convince the Americans to bear the burden of burning through ISIS. That strategy too has failed and now Turkey is reluctantly and fearfully preparing to relaunch regional imperial strategies it last used over a century ago. Any meaningful Turkish resurgence will almost by definition wreck a panoply of Iranian interests. Ankara is very ready for that shift militarily and economically, but it’s barely considered it philosophically or intellectually. Everything with the Turks these days is softly softly. But one day the dam of restraint will break and the Turks will surge. The only question is where will they surge first? As a vastly inferior power to Turkey, the Iranians are particularly obsessed with that question.
As a country with no military tradition worthy of the name, Saudi Arabia is by far the most terrified of American disengagement and so hopes to scuttle the entire American-Iranian entente. Not because Riyadh thinks it will keep the Americans involved, but because it will hamstring Iranian options. This strategy includes pushing full force against Iranian interests in every regional theater — Lebanon, Gaza, Syria, Iraq, Kurdistan, Yemen, Iran and Pakistan — so that Iran bleeds from a dozen cuts. It is now the Saudis — not the Chinese or Russians or Iranians — that have the most violent and aggressive foreign policy in the world.
Financial sanctions; diplomatic isolation; peer pressure – these are the tools the West is using to convince the Putin government that it should abandon its “Ukraine adventure.”
They are the wrong tools for the wrong job. The Russians are not in the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine to boost Putin’s popularity at home or out of a fit of pique that Ukraine had a revolution. Russian power is in motion as part of the first stage of an extended effort to secure the Russian homeland. Moscow will continue until the European Union and NATO either form an unbreakable wall of opposition or crumble.
Russian territory is part of an endless flatland unparalleled in the world. The open portions of the Eurasian steppe are nearly as large as the entirety of the US Lower-48. Web-working infrastructure across its arid plains proved so expensive that even the strategic-minded, price-insensitive Soviets sharply circumscribed their efforts. Even today, only one road and two rail corridors venture east of the Urals to lay claim to Siberia. Russia is a place where only a manpower-heavy military capable of swarming over vast tracks of land can rule effectively. Let’s call it the Hordelands.
Key to ruling the Hordelands is the ability to limit outsiders from entering them; once they do, any defender becomes locked in a war of mobility and attrition. The trick is to reinforce all nine of the lands’ access points: the Tien-Altay Gap, the Central Asian Corridor, the two Caucasus coastal approaches, the Crimea, the Bessarabian Gap, the Polish Gap, the Baltic coast and the White Sea coast. Failure transforms the Hordelands into a bloody buffet. The Soviet Union once controlled all nine. The day the Soviet Empire fell in 1992, those holdings were reduced to two. With Russia’s reacquiring of the Crimea in February, Moscow now is up to three.
That explains why, but not why now? The Russian resurgence began almost fifteen years ago, shortly after which Russia rationalized its finances and debt. As early as 2006, high energy prices granted the Kremlin more cash than it could spend. Russia proved it could implement complex and sustained intelligence and military operations as early as 2008. Why now, in 2014, is Moscow finally moving?
Simply put, it is running out of people.
Immediately after the Cold War’s end, the bottom fell out of the Russian birth rate, gutting the lower ranks of the Russian population structure. A quarter of a century later, there are more 50-somethings than teenagers. In five short years, those teenagers will prove inadequate to fill the Red Army’s ranks. If Russia is to use that army to re-anchor the Hordelands’ access points, it needs to do so while it has enough soldiers.
Instead, a would-be engineer must first apprentice with an established engineer for several years. Technical training in Russia collapsed before the Soviet fall, and now the youngest cadre of engineers who have the full suite of technical skills has entered their 50s. In chauvinist Russia, nearly all are men, and according to the last non-politicized data that escaped the Federal State Statistics Service, male mortality is only 59. Maintaining the Russian system — which includes everything from the national rail network to the natural gas fields to Moscow’s steam tunnels to the Red Army to the nuclear missile forces — for a territory as expansive as the Hordelands requires a huge skilled labor pool that Russia simply no longer has. In a few short years, Russia will degrade from having a very small and expensive skilled labor pool to not having one at all, forcing the Russians to choose which bits of their system to not maintain.
If the re-anchoring is not achieved soon, Russia will lose the ability to even try, which would condemn it to wither from within. While the overall Russian demography is failing, the damage is almost wholly concentrated among ethnic Russians. There are many minorities — largely Muslim minorities such as the Tatars and the Chechens — whose demographics are as young, healthy and growing as the Russians are aging, sick and shrinking. Adding Ukrainians and more to the mix will certainly make managing Russia’s “internal” issues more complicated, but intimidating minorities into compliance is a bit of a national pastime. Russia has been doing it — and doing it with frightening effectiveness — so long as there has been a Russia. Maintaining control over such diverse groups in a country with secure external borders is feasible. Doing it with exposed borders is not.
And so the Russians are coming. Coming for Crimea, and Donetsk and Torez and Luhansk and Slovyansk and Odessa. And not just for Ukraine, but for Georgia and Armenia and Azerbaijan and Moldova and Belarus. And when that is done Romania and Estonia and Lithuania and Latvia and Poland. In an era when there enough Russians to man Russia, Moscow thinks of the independence of all of these places as a disturbing academic exercise. In an era where Russia is running out of Russians, the independence of all of these places is a mortal threat. The Russians will not stop until either they re-anchor or are made to stop, and there currently simply isn’t a recognition in Europe that this has already gotten very real.
Which brings us to two outcomes: one financial, one strategic.
Financially, the Russians have far more room to maneuver than most think. They have $1 trillion saved in various funds — one of the upsides of a demography that is dying young is that retirement funds can be used for other things — and can survive any sanctions the West can throw at them. The Russians also are making a gambit for survival, and if pushed willing to walk away from everything – partnerships with ExxonMobil, debt payments, shipments of nickel, even long-term natural gas sales. Russia is happy to continue to sell the world its wares — and certainly prefers to — but if a choice is forced between Russia’s expansion to defensible borders and a few hundred billion in annual economic gains, bet on gritty austerity rather than capitulation to sanctions.
Strategically, three of the Hordelands’ access points — Bessarabia, Poland and the Baltic — will require the Russians challenging EU and NATO members. Aside from a few hundred troops rotating through NATO’s border states, there currently is no indication that any EU or NATO country is taking the Russian advance seriously. Moreover, the European countries — and this includes the five NATO/EU members that face the direct threat — have had 25 years to wean themselves off of Russian energy, but have instead moved in the opposite direction. Their strategic policy is to rely on Russia to keep the lights on, and to rely on America to protect them from Russia. The result of those (in)actions is a painfully uncomfortable question: will the Americans bleed for those who have proven unwilling to raise anything but the pitch of their voices in their own defense?
Those curious can find the answer to that question and the world that unfolds in its aftermath in The Accidental Superpower, available November 4, 2014.
The Iranian nuclear deal is moving forward as President Obama just recently secured the last vote necessary to prevent the US legislature from blocking the agreement. This agreement gives Iran some significant concessions regarding uranium enrichment and there is considerable hand-wringing in the United States over Iran’s nuclear potential.
