Zelensky and Putin. The Russo-Ukrainian War.

IEE and LSI.

My initial thought for Zelensky was SEE, but I've come around to IEE. See no basis for EIE whatsoever. 

Zelensky and Putin could not be more different in how they process information. Putin probably doesn't even know what it means to say what you think. His whole life he has been concealing what he thinks. He receives curated briefings from those further down in his chain of command and has little desire to get direct access to unprocessed information "on the ground" or to feel out sentiment through direct contact with audiences. His own messages are formal, scheduled, and attended only by select individuals, contain almost no useful information, and are meant to convey strength, certainty, and security. He has built a fear-based power hierarchy ( + ) whose weak spot is its inability to convey accurate primary information up and down the chain of command.

Putin's notorious unpredictability is less a feature of his own personality than a result of not letting anyone know anything about what's going on.

All this points to extremely devalued .

Zelensky, in contrast, feels comfortable and natural engaging with different kinds of audiences informally and on a continual basis. He likes to make surprise appearances. He likes to get a sense of the situation on the ground, to see for himself and gather primary information. He tends to say what he thinks and feels. He doesn't emphasize his higher standing or create tense, formal settings where people will respect and fear him (devalued ). Though he appeals to emotions and common values, his language is simple rather than poetic or flowery. Zelensky sometimes has to talk about painful subjects, but he doesn't do much to dramatize them (heighten the emotion) like an EIE likely would (for an EIE this would be "low-hanging fruit"). My impression is that internally he brushes off unpleasant emotions quite easily; clearly he has preserved his sense of humor. If you review Zelensky's past as a multi-skilled comedic performer, you'll see plenty of this emotional "lightness."

Since Ukraine has gained the upper hand in the conflict, I don't see any clear weak areas in their war effort to comment on. Also, Zelensky has only been in power for a few years and hasn't had anything near the effect on Ukraine's power structure that Putin has had on Russia's. 

If you're interested in my opinion on the war, I am 100% on Ukraine's side and follow the war closely using information sources and analysis in English, Russian, and Ukrainian. I've lived in both countries for years and am in contact with hundreds of Russians, Ukrainians, Belorussians, etc. A friend of mine was Zelensky's personal translator for six months.

Russia's cause is unequivocally unjust and they will continue to lose harder and harder because they have no plan and are gradually sliding into a checkmate situation. They will not succeed in cancelling post-WWII international law. The law is on Ukraine's side, and the West will not weaken support for Ukraine because this means giving up on its entire set of political values — an unacceptable proposition. On the contrary, the West has so much to gain by supporting Ukraine that it is absolutely bound to continue. For its relatively minor investment, it can revive Western political values, reap the rewards of fighting for a just cause — renewed national unity and purpose (particularly in countries neighboring Russia, where this sentiment is obviously strongest), gain a powerful new partner — Ukraine — which is loyal to the West's values, and update the international system of law and order after Russia is defeated.

The West's weak spot is its finances. High debt-to-GDP ratios are likely to create chaos in many countries around the world in the next decade, including sharp currency devaluations.

Putin's primary strategic blunder seems to be a direct result of systematically ignoring primary information sources for many years. He was led to believe by fearful, dishonest agents in his chain of command that Russia would actually find support in Ukraine. How he could've believed that is beyond me. He also totally miscalculated the West's response due to his perception of Western weakness when judging the West by his own measures of strength. Note also that he and other Russian leaders characterize Zelensky as not being a "serious" politician. 

Today's Russia is an empire in decline: demographics and GDP point to this clearly. The type of fascism the state is promoting isn't the youthful, optimistic fascism of Nazi Germany, but a kind of sickly death-focused fascism "for old times' sake." It's like the Roman Empire in decline, still under the influence of seductive ideas of greatness while no longer possessing the foundation thereof. Soldiers largely have to be tricked into service and don't know what they're fighting for or have adopted a flimsy and ever-changing explanation for their purpose in Ukraine. Their Ukrainian counterparts know exactly what they're fighting for and don't have to find new narratives every few weeks to generate outrage.

If Russia doesn't have a revolution or widespread public uprising along with its inevitable defeat in Ukraine, it is likely to turn inward, terrorize its own shrinking populace, and barriccade itself off from the outside world like North Korea.