Tyzhnevyk journalists talk to Oleksandr Chupak, the head of economic programmes of the non-governmental analytical centre – “Ukrainian Studies of Strategic Studies”, about the current issues of international politics and the events of the Moscow-Ukrainian war.
– Oleksandr, in one of your posts a few months ago, you wrote that the expected decline in Moscow’s economy during the two years of the war did not happen. Do Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries change this situation? Recently, we have seen this not only in the refinery but also in Russian energy, etc.
– The oil and gas industry of Russia is the main source of income for the aggressor’s state budget, about a third of all its income. The occupier planned to earn about 120 million dollars from energy carriers in 2024, and it is going to spend about the same amount on military needs. Depriving Russia of oil and gas revenues is the key to its financial exhaustion.
Let the economic sanctions against Moscow reduce its revenues from the sale of oil by about 25% in 2023, the aggressor until recently continued to extract fossil fuels at the level of previous years, and the oil refining industry worked at the same pace. However, as a result of Ukrainian strikes, more than 20% of the capacities of Russian refineries were damaged in 2024 alone. This has already caused a significant increase in fuel prices inside Moscow, which has forced the government to impose a six-month embargo on fuel exports. However, the main thing is that the stoppage of the refinery forces the Russians to reduce the supply of processing products to the front line and reduces their export capacity.
If Ukraine can inflict such blows for a long time, Moscow’s economy may find itself in a difficult situation. If we add regular energy strikes, the occupier will be forced to divert a huge amount of resources from military needs to re###############
build its infrastructure.
– A sensational article in the FT says that the White House is allegedly unhappy that Ukraine is destroying Russian gas stations. Do you consider the article real or a Moscow throw-in? And can anything today stop our new tactic of fighting the enemy? There is still no American aid.
– For now, it is not necessary to claim that there is no American aid because Ukraine will continue to receive weapons from the USA for many months under previously concluded contracts. That is about 500 million dollars every month until the end of 2024. Hopefully, Congress will vote on additional aid in the coming weeks.
The FT article may be true, as the Biden administration is genuinely interested in keeping the global oil price from rising. The increase in the price of “black gold” means an increase in the cost of fuel in the US domestic market, which may harm Biden’s rating before the presidential elections, which will be held in November. Ukrainian strikes on Moscow refineries lead to a reduction in the supply of oil products on the world market, causing prices to rise.
We’ll see what happens next, but currently, Russian factories continue to work. So perhaps reports of White House displeasure are false. Or Kyiv managed to convince Washington of the expediency of its tactics.
– Has there been anything similar in world history, when victory on the battlefield is ensured by destroying the economy?
– The economic component of wars has always been extremely important, but not decisive. We can recall Napoleon’s attempts to defeat Great Britain through a trade blockade, which in the end did not cause significant damage to London.
During the First World War, Germany launched a large-scale campaign using submarines against the British merchant fleet. During the Second World War, the Allies carried out almost daily bombings of German industrial centres for several years.
In none of the examples given, was the destruction of the economy a decisive military factor. However, it must necessarily accompany other components of a large-scale war: combat operations directly on the battlefield, propaganda, etc. If today Russia were not harmed by sanctions and Ukrainian strikes, it could direct much more resources to war than it is capable of today.
– We have little true information about what is actually happening in Russia. In such a case, can we count on the fact that the enslaved nations will still rise and the empire will collapse? Are there any signs of dissatisfaction?
– As for any colonial empire, enslaved nations are the key to the collapse of Russia. The modern Muscovite Empire includes 21 national republics and more than 100 nationalities, which have their own culture, history of struggle for freedom and experience of suppression by the aggressor.
Today, Muscovy is particularly vulnerable, despite its apparent external stability. Putin’s empire is characterized by a shaky consensus between the Moscow centre and local elites, whose loyalty rests on stable cash flows from the government. But in the conditions of a full-scale war, it is becoming more and more difficult for Moscow to satisfy the needs of local elites.
In the past few months alone, we have seen popular demonstrations in Bashkortostan, actions of local rebels in Ingushetia, representatives of the enslaved nations of Russia joining the Defence Forces of Ukraine, etc. Oppressed nations today lack coordination and foreign support. Ukraine is just beginning to work with the nations of Russia by recognizing their right to self-determination, supporting the governments in exile, and creating national armed formations in the ranks of the Armed Forces. In the future, we should move directly to supporting the liberation movements on the ground.
Only the collapse of the Moscow empire into dozens of independent states can bring victory to Ukraine. Such a scenario is quite possible and to implement it, we need to make maximum efforts.
– Ukraine understands that Russia – this colossus on clay feet – must fall. Who else understands this? What will the mega-cautious Western world say about this?
– For many centuries, Western political elites have perceived Russia as a constant: an integral part of the Eurasian space and their business partner. Whenever Moscow was on the verge of collapse – twice during the 20th century – the West tried to prevent its collapse.
However, after the start of a full-scale war, conversations about the need for the collapse of Russia began to become louder and louder. Let the representatives of the official authorities of our allied states not talk about it, the topic of the division of the empire is being actively discussed in analytical circles. A prominent representative of this direction is Janusz Bugaiskyi, a senior analyst at the Jamestown Foundation in Washington, a participant in the 11th Bandera readings, and the author of a book about the collapse of Russia. Without a doubt, he and similar analysts have considerable authority in the power circles of Western countries, promoting the theme of the liquidation of the empire.
– In your personal opinion, can the world not stop this bloody war for economic reasons – based on cheap energy resources? Is it from fear of the dictator? Or from other motives? Why do people call a person, whose hands are covered in blood up to the elbow, and express condolences in connection with a terrorist attack?
– As was said above, wars are not won exclusively by economic methods. All the more so because Russia can now count on the support of two major partners: China and India, which together buy more than two-thirds of Moscow’s oil exports. On the other hand, even in the West, not everyone is ready to completely refuse cooperation with the aggressor. For example, Russia almost did not reduce the supply to the EU of nuclear reactor components, and rough diamonds, and continues to trade with Europe in grain, etc.
Condolences in connection with the terrorist attack is a formal diplomatic procedure, but it also shows that Putin is still perceived as a full-fledged representative of the world’s political elite. The position of the West will change only when it is directly hit by Russian missiles on its own territory. But then it may be too late…
Свобода
