Writing for Fortune magazine, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, associate dean at Yale School of Management, and Steven Tian, research director at Yale's Chief Executive Leadership Institute, mockingly, brutally but refreshingly dismember the media's self-appointed, foreign policy connoisseurs. These opening paragraphs provide a taste of what the authors say the faux mavens of Putin's geopolitical strategizing have served up.
"The dramatic coverage and media commentary are filled with fact-free speculation and dark, foreboding images of a savvy, smirking triumphant Vladimir Putin splintering the West. Many of these voices imply that Putin holds the grand puppeteer position on energy issues, with enormous economic leverage over the rest of the world, worsened by weak Western governments that are supposedly asleep at the switch, divided amongst themselves, or reflexively hostile on energy challenges plunging Western nations into Russia-induced recession....
"Sure, it is fun to throw bean bags at the Biden administration’s energy policies–but the alarmist image that business media narratives have relentlessly promoted is not supported by the facts. In fact, quite the opposite is happening under the surface, even if it has been little trumpeted."
Sonnenfeld and Tian cite "genuine energy experts" who have explained the geopolitical stupidity of Putin’s "energy reactive machinations, especially as the Russian economy implodes and Russia’s status as an energy exporter deteriorates significantly." Says energy scholar Daniel Howard Yergin, an economic historian and vice chairman of S&P Global, "In just a few weeks, Putin has destroyed the internationalized economy he has been building for more than 20 years, as well as the reputation Russia has cultivated as a reliable supplier…. What he has done is to undermine and debase Russia’s most important source of economic power.”
The authors also refer us to Jason Bordoff at the Center on Global Energy Policy, Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, and Meghan O'Sullivan, professor of international affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of Windfall: How the New Energy Abundance Upends Global Politics and Strengthens America’s Power. Say these scholars succinctly, Russia's entire energy policy has been "self-defeating for Putin economically."
In that vein, the Fortune mag commentators add that Putin is "far more" dependent on European markets than the world is on Putin's energy supply. For example, in 2021 Europe imported 46% of its energy from the Russian dictator, but Russia "exported 83% of its energy to Europe!" The authors also write that as they showed in the online, scholarly journal SSRN, formerly known as the Social Science Research Network, Putin's maladministration of his nation's energy "is just one dimension of a systematic collapse of the Russian economy."
They then resume what I find to be their delightful bashing of certain broadcast and print imposters of foreign policy expertise. "Clearly, there is no economic genius or market savvy" — as daily feeds inform us — "driving Putin's disruptive energy hijinks." As for the West, they observe that it's "far from being passive"; "policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic largely recognize the pressing energy challenges and are taking decisive collective action accordingly."
Peppered throughout their article, the authors offer plentiful, tasty lambastes of the pseudo-chefs: "Unfortunately for Putin, besides the Cassandra-like handwringing of some misguided media commentators, there remains little evidence that his efforts to lever energy as the wedge to divide civil society are paying any concrete dividends."
In conclusion, Sonnefelfd and Tian offer this exacting swipe: "Despite the riveting doomsday coverage designed for TV audiences and the fact-free cynical skepticism, the facts suggest that when it comes to energy challenges, it is Putin who is running out of gas while the West has been busy refueling elsewhere."
As noted, the authors write "unfortunately for Putin...." Yet also unfortunate is that Sonnenfeld and Tian's article will likely go unread by the all-knowing pretenders. If it is read widely, their biting commentary will also likely be dismissed as eggheaded sour grapes; the scholars and real experts also desire the fame and fortune that stems from being part of major media outlets, the naysayers will say to themselves. And that will be that. Poor, misguided reporting will soldier on.