Russia

Reading the Substrate argued that analysis of conflict tends to read a story first and the ground beneath it late, and that the ordering is often backwards in its emphasis: ideas set a conflict’s direction, conditions set its reach. That was a claim using looking backwards, about explaining wars that have already happened. A fair question is whether the same method survives being turned around to face forward. If conditions set reach, can a reading of conditions say anything useful about what comes next? ...

We are told that world politics is a chess game. Grandmasters move pieces across a board, sacrificing pawns to protect kings, calculating six moves ahead. It is rational. It is elegant. It is, above all, knowable. This is a lie. After walking through the resource wars of Venezuela, Greenland, Iran, Ukraine, Russia and China, and after one reader finally lost patience and called a certain former president a “greedy twat”, a different metaphor emerged. Not chess. Not even regular poker. ...

Note: All personal names have been anonymised unless the individual has a verifiable public presence and wishes to be visible. I choose to run risks; I will not make that choice for others. He was 21 and already battling high blood pressure. His doctors confirmed it. His exemption papers were in order. But that didn’t stop them from coming for him. One morning in spring 2025, he opened his door to find officers holding a digital summons. No discussion. No delay. He was on a bus to a training facility by nightfall. Within a week, he was at the Ukrainian border, terrified, untrained, and furious. ...