Russia is running out of money. President Vladimir Putin is taking a strategic gamble, depleting the Kremlin's last reserve funds to cover the budget and to pay for an escalating war in Syria at the same time.

The three big rating agencies have all issued alerts over recent days, warning that the country's public finances are deteriorating fast and furiously. Alexei Kudrin, the former finance minister, says the Kremlin has no means of raising large loans to ride out the oil bust. The pool of internal savings is pitifully small.

Vladislav Inozemtsev, from the Center for Post-Industrial Studies in Moscow, says Russia is entering a period of pauperized decline. Russia’s GDP, once at $2.3 trillion, is now at $1.2 trillion, the size of Mexico’s and smaller than that of Texas ($1.4 trillion), and continues to rapidly shrink.

Yet Russia is pressing ahead with massive rearmament, pushing defense spending towards 5% of GDP and risking the sort of military overstretch that bankrupted the Soviet Union. Bankruptcy and ruination are clearly on Russia’s horizon under Putin.

Russian leader Vladimir Putin has issued a caustic defense of his country's bombing raids in Syria, accusing the West of stonewalling requests for help on terrorist targets and failing to grasp the basic facts on the ground.

"We asked them to give us the information on the targets that they believe to be 100 percent terrorists and they refused to do that," he said.

"We then asked to please tell us which targets are not terrorists, and there was no answer, so what are we supposed to do. I am not making this up," he told a VTB Capital forum of bankers and investors in Moscow yesterday (10/13).

"I think some of our partners simply have mush for brains. They do not have a clear understanding of what is really happening in the country and what goals they are seeking to achieve," he said. Clearly understood by everyone was that by “our partners,” he was referring to Barack Obama.

By the end of the conference however…

October is traditionally the time for harvest festivals in communities throughout the US and here in Britain. In fact, the word “harvest” comes from Old English hærfest, meaning “autumn.”

I have just taken a ride on the combine harvester cutting wheat on my farm in Northumberland. It is such a sophisticated threshing machine that long gone are the days when I could be trusted to take the controls during the lunch break.

A screen showed how the GPS was steering it, inch-perfect and hands-free, along the edge of the unharvested crop; another screen gave an instant readout of the yield. It was averaging over five tons (kilotons, 1,000 kilos or 2,200 lbs) per acre (or 12 tons per hectare) — a record.

This is Precision Farming. It and other hi-tech developments have resulted in the Food and Agriculture Organization’s food price index now well below where it was throughout the 1960s and 1970s: that is to say, it’s proving cheaper and easier to feed seven billion today than it was to feed three billion in 1960. And on much less land. The Eco-Doomsters are of course unhappy.

There are several scenarios the Obama administration may be entertaining as it pursues its diplomacy in the Middle East.

It may believe that the new agreement with Iran will lead to “engagement” with reform-minded theocrats. Or perhaps an Obama-inspired second green revolution will overthrow the regime.

Alternatively, the administration may imagine that a Shiite Axis — Iran, Syria, Iraq, Hezbollah, Hamas — empowered by Putin’s Russia, will balance the region.

Or, the United States may simply wish to abdicate the Middle East and let the players there all fight it out, reentering when the players are worn out and defeated.

All these scenarios are probably fantasies. In truth, the deal will make the world a much more dangerous place. Here are five reasons why.

Last week the Obama administration was caught off guard by Russia’s rapid rise in Syria.

As the Russians began bombing a US-supported militia along the Damascus-Homs highway, Secretary of State John Kerry was meeting with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, at the UN. Just hours before their meeting Kerry was insisting that Russia’s presence in Syria would likely be a positive development.

Putin understands the opportunity of the moment. He views the decomposition of Syria as an opportunity to rebuild Russia’s power and influence in the Middle East – at America’s expense.

Unlike Mr. Putin however, Barack Hussein Obama is moved not by power calculations rooted in reality but by ideological dictates. Thus
Obama’s position cannot be swayed by evidence, even when evidence shows that his delusional policies endanger US national security.

This brings us to Israel. It too has leaders who are delusional – and you’d be very surprised to learn who they are.