Russian President Vladimir Putin has prompted us to see it again as “the West” The liberal democratic market economy suffered a severe crisis of confidence in the 15 years following the 2008 financial crisis. Putin’s February 24 invasion of Ukraine has all but swept away the timidity, self-doubt and division that the West could have expected.As Timothy Snyder did, Putin certainly anticipated this well explained In a conversation with The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent.

While the West’s response needs to be more forceful — a total embargo on Russian energy exports is imperative, and military support for Ukraine is more ambitious — there’s no denying that the West’s resolve has surprised even itself.

Two recent speeches show how the war has inspired under-appreciated forces in the West. In Chatham House, London, Wally Adeyemo, Under Secretary of the Treasury, Say: “Russia’s brutal and unprovoked attack on Ukraine – at its most basic level – is a rejection of the underlying principles of the post-war system we have built together”, which is based on “the rules, norms and Values ??”Decades of Growth and Poverty Reduction”.

We don’t just have to protect this common system of rules. Adeyemo’s key insights are because We have established a common system of rules, and we have the ability to do serious damage to the Russian economy. He said:

“Our ability to so quickly undermine the Kremlin’s ability to finance its priorities and reduce its ability to project power is a direct result of our cooperation and collective investment in the international economic system.”

Another speech was given by Jeremy Fleming, UK intelligence chief, who claimed Putin’s adviser didn’t tell him the truth, U.S. intelligence officials have also raised this point.Secretary of State Anthony Blinken Comment That: “One of the Achilles’ heels of dictatorships is that in those systems no one speaks the truth or has the ability to speak truth to power.”

These presentations highlighted something I think we often forget. Many features of liberal democracy seem to put us at a disadvantage in direct conflict with authoritarian regimes like Putin: our openness makes us easy to read, democratic decision-making sacrifices decisiveness, and the rule of law limits space for action. In reality, however, these seeming weaknesses are a source of great strength. What I mean by speeches is that it is the self-imposed demands of liberal democracy — its system of binding rules, its openness, its need to accommodate the vast majority of its members — that makes it resilient.

In the Ukraine war, we can see at least three examples, whether through Russian shortcomings or Western successes.1. Adejemo’s view on economic strength: it is because Economy The value of a rules-based order is that keeping it out is such a powerful weapon.

Second, an open society has an information advantage. They may not be able to keep too many secrets – but because of that, they’re less likely to fool themselves. When the truth is freely expressed, a democratic leader who really wants to be told cannot be kept in the dark by his or her inner circle. Ordinary people will not be as betrayed by the Russian conscripts Putin denies ever being sent to Ukraine.

Third, the sense that everyone is following the same rules—the simple meaning of “rules-based order” or “rule of law”—creates trust, cooperation, and popular support.A largely true public sphere is a key reason why Western countries overcome the divergent interests of sanctions, for example, their publics are well aware of Who is responsible for high energy prices.

These usually discreet charms of liberal democracy are on vivid display in Ukraine itself. The country’s intermittent but firm moves towards Western society put it in an advantageous position in the war. It supports the legitimacy and leadership of President Volodymyr Zelensky and contributes to the extraordinary communication and solidarity of representatives of Ukraine at all levels. People close to Ukraine told me that earlier decentralization reforms, which improved local accountability and leeway as relevant knowledge on the ground, now contribute to military efficiency.

The full text of Zelensky’s recent interview is worth reading (one to economist there’s still one independent russian journalist). They show that the Ukrainian president is fully aware that this fight is not just about territory or even freedom, but about what kind of society Ukraine will become.Fighting for the West and Liberal Democracy militarily is in line with the Ukrainian fight pre-existing efforts Building a less corrupt, more rules-based economy integration with the EUThere is, in Snyder’s words, a “staunch pluralist,” and Zelensky is one of them.

There are two important forward-looking lessons to draw from.

One is about the value of liberal democracy. Francis Fukuyama’s old thesis, which ultimately proves that nothing attracts people more than liberal democracy, well, it’s still there and it works.Matthew Iglesias well discussed How two competing ideas of the 1990s—Fukuyama’s “The End of History” and Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations”—underpin today’s geopolitics.

According to Iglesias, the real fault line of the conflict is “good government and bad government”, and Zelensky is “trying to give the people the essential ingredients for the end of history . . . good government, self-government and prosperity through integration with the richer parts of the world.” For now, that’s fine, although there’s still ideological competition. Not against political Islam, as Iglesias suggests, but against the belief that liberal democracies are bound to be in a system with strong and unfettered leaders, management information, nativism, and social conservatism propaganda The lure of underperformance — in short, fascism. This is not a new struggle, so it doesn’t invalidate Fukuyama’s end-of-history conclusion—though it shows how anti-democratic forces will continue to try to delay the end of history.

Another lesson is about Ukraine itself. Molly McKew Let’s lift our eyes to the horizon and try to imagine What a victory for Ukraine could mean:

“Ukraine is trying to buy us all A different future. Trying to force us to see that there might be a— if Putin is defeated here, and if We did this together. If only they could give us enough imagination in time. . . it is not Russia that must be defeated, but Putinism. Gambling in Ukraine makes this possible. . . the survival of Ukraine, if it is a victory for all of us, will underpin this newly rejuvenated Europe and carry it forward [to a] In a future where Europe will not end on a hard eastern border, Russians will not feel isolated and misjudged by their European cousins. Ukraine is not a bloody place to conquer empires, but a brilliant new engine for a better future for all of us. “

Nothing is more dangerous than this. Ukrainians are risking their lives for such a future.the West, especially the European Union get everything from joining their fight.

other readings

digital news

• The latest data is post Today is the Personal Consumption Expenditure Price Index, the Fed’s measure of inflation.