Why cutting Russia off from Swift isn't so simple

The financial nuclear option. And the real nuclear option.

From Claire—it occurred to me that it’s probably not worth my time to summarize the news from Kiev. It’s on the front pages of every major newspaper. I’ve had a sleepless night following the news, and if you subscribe to the Cosmopolitan Globalist, you’ve probably been following the same news. (Our target market is not “people who wouldn’t have the first clue what happened last night in Ukraine,” right?) So I’ll skip the summary. We knew at the outset we couldn’t compete on breaking news, and besides, we’re not in Ukraine.

However, Vladislav Davidzon is in Ukraine—he’s said we can interview him later today—and he’s actually in his element; this is just a superb account: ‘Russian Ship … Go F**k Yourself!’

As he writes: Even in the face of certain death, Ukrainians are displaying heroism worthy of the darkest days of World War II.

We can’t compete with that. (Not until we can afford to pay him more than our competitors.)

But here’s where we can compete. The screams to cut Russia off of SWIFT now? I’m firmly with the screamers. But Vivek is making very important points here about the risks involved, and if you’re wondering why it’s taking everyone so long to figure out whether they should pull the trigger, this is why.

One line of the article jumped out at me as I was editing it.

…. the Cold War theory of mutually assured destruction, or MAD, assumed that military superpowers would make rational calculations, with rational actors at the helm. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine puts the rational actor theory into doubt.

This is exactly right: 75 years of carefully-elaborated nuclear deterrence doctrine looks a little stupid about now, doesn’t it? Putin clearly wants to die in a bunker, what’s to say he doesn’t want to take us all with him?

That said, MAD is all we’ve got. And we have to hope he’s faking it, because if he wants to take us all down with him, he pretty much can. Since we can’t do much if he’s genuinely nuts, we have to try to deter him as if he’s rational.

And I’m afraid the key to that is looking absolutely nuts ourselves.

To that effect, I propose that Biden begin the day by announcing that the United States is bringing back the draft, effective noon today. Every able-bodied man is now required to defend the nation. (Don’t bother with “every able-bodied woman,” Putin doesn’t care about that; and besides, someone needs to govern the country while our men are off ripping the guts out of Russians and laying waste to their crops.) We’ll be putting two million US troops in Europe within three months. Say: We demand Putin’s unconditional surrender. Every nation in Europe should make a similar, coordinated announcement.

We must make it clear to everyone around Putin that he may wish to perish in a bunker or a thermonuclear Holocaust, but they don’t have to. And trust me: If we look like we mean it, they’ll know what to do. It’s a mafia regime, not a death cult; if we make it plain that we are nuts, his officers will get rid of him by tomorrow.

And no, don’t tell me the virtue of Trump was that the Russians thought he might be crazy enough to nuke them. They didn’t. Trump is an abject physical coward who supplicated cravenly in Putin’s presence and everyone but his weirdo cult followers knows that full well. If you want to know what courage looks like—look at Zelensky. You think Trump would do that? Give me a break.

I don’t believe Biden will have the wherewithal to do the necessary either, unfortunately. But I’m giving him my best advice—after a sleepless night, admittedly.

He may wish to take other opinions under advisement.