Filenews 20 November 2024 - by Marc Champion
It wasn't so long ago that some Western leaders boasted about Russia's "strategic defeat" in Ukraine. An admission that proved wrong not only on the battlefield, but also in communication, since then Vladimir Putin has not stopped reproducing the false claims that sending troops across Russian borders was not for expansionist reasons, but to defend the country from Western aggression. Today, more than 1,000 days after the start of the war, the first signs of such a strategic defeat are beginning to become visible. But the potential losers are Ukraine and its allies, not Putin.
Also, we should not blame Donald Trump in advance if Putin manages to crush Ukraine and achieve his war goals next year. While the rhetoric of some of the new president's close associates and advisers on the Ukrainian issue ranges from dangerous to catastrophic – and it would be better to stop it – but the main responsibility lies elsewhere.
Some Republicans who favour Trump's "peace here and now" approach have been more vocal supporters of stronger support for Kiev than the Biden administration. They wanted the White House and European allies to provide Ukraine with a wider range of military aid, in larger quantities and much faster. The war continues today, with Ukrainian forces struggling to hold the line of defense, largely because that didn't happen in 2014 or 2022.
On the other hand, the same Republicans claim that time in the hourglass is now over, calling on Ukrainians to accept whatever peace deal Putin is willing to offer, on the timeline chosen by Trump.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky agrees that the war must end next year; The disagreement is about how. Kiev, like allies from the Baltic states, Britain, Poland and Scandinavia, understands that at this stage Putin has no incentive to negotiate anything and therefore will not do so. He has the advantage on the battlefield and sees the West's resolve crumble before his eyes. When Putin talks about peace, he means the surrender of Ukraine.
There is only one answer to this dilemma that does not lead to strategic defeat for Ukraine and its NATO allies: an immediate change of approach to the supply issue and alignment of the West toward the goal of reviving Ukrainian forces. Only in this way can there be renewed prospect of achieving a lasting ceasefire that will allow Ukraine to feel safe and independent. And this must be done wisely and coordinated.
Are we close to that? Probably not. On Friday, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz became the first Western leader to call Vladimir Putin in two years, without first making sure Kiev and its allies were on the same line — and, of course, with no prospect of success. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been quick to follow him, leaking ideas for a peace plan he wants to mediate.
Both leaders walked through the door opened by Trump, talking about hastening the end of the war, but they did so for personal political gain. Scholz is on his way out of power, having called early elections in Germany. He seems desperate for a miracle to reverse his political fortunes, and his uncoordinated, unscheduled phone conversation with Putin was the result of that treaty.
Erdogan has seen himself as a mediator between Moscow and the West since the beginning of the conflict. He had earlier been remarkably successful in negotiating a deal to keep grain flowing from Ukraine's blockaded ports, but failed to address the bigger picture. And he has no intention of letting Trump, Scholz or anyone else steal his glory.
As Zelensky said after Scholz and Putin called, doing so could open Pandora's box — and he was right. What is likely to emerge is a show of vanity with offers of "leadership" to end the war, something that can only benefit Putin. The Kremlin rejected without a second thought Erdogan's plan, which included freezing operations on several front lines, delaying Ukraine's NATO membership for ten years and deploying international peacekeepers in a demilitarized safe zone.
Ukraine and its allies must immediately align their resource allocation strategy. Kiev's forces are fighting with vigour and determination, as always. Ammunition supplies and the advantage in drone warfare have improved since last year, but are not enough to offset Russia's growing manpower superiority. Attrition, late conscription by Zelensky and a bold but ultimately failed gamble to regain the initiative on the battlefield by seizing Russian territory near Kursk have led to the current situation. Ukrainian forces are losing territory at a faster rate than at any time since spring 2022.
All this does not mean that Russia has overcome its multiple weaknesses, which have cost it hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded, without hitting Putin's goal of gaining control of Ukraine. However, Russia has room to withstand further losses. It also now has allies willing to provide it with weapons and even troops to bolster its war effort.
The Biden administration is right to provide as much assistance as possible before leaving the stage. Also correct, though long overdue, is the decision to approve the use of ATACMS tactical ballistic missiles by Ukraine against targets inside Russia. Ukraine reportedly fired one of these U.S. missiles at Russia for the first time early Tuesday, targeting an ammunition depot.
The restrictions had been imposed for fear of escalation by Russia, but Putin, of course, escalated anyway. Russia's deployment of North Korean soldiers and tactical ballistic missiles has already been confirmed. The DPRK's Hwasoong-11GA missiles have a maximum range of 900 kilometers and a payload of 500 kilograms, compared to the 300 kilometers and about 240 kilograms of ATACMS.
Ukraine's allies need to coordinate their efforts to advance a plan that secures as many supplies as quickly as possible, rather than competing over who will "win" peace. World leaders, including members of the incoming Trump administration, must take care to send a clear message to Putin, so much so that the Russian president understands that refusing to negotiate with Zelensky will incur such high costs that he could even jeopardize his position at home.
Permission for Ukraine to use ATACMS inside Russia is one step, but it alone is not enough. So is an additional $5 billion worth of weapons shipments from the U.S., expected to be pushed to the Ukrainian front in the coming months. Add to this the Nordic initiative to finance Ukraine's domestic weapons production (from ammunition to missiles), the timely tactical retreat of troops from Kursk to reinforce the front lines inside Ukraine or better train and deploy Ukrainian forces.
Is all this enough? As individual actions, no. But executed together, with a coherent new strategy, these moves have the potential to quickly halt Russia's territorial advances and perhaps reverse some of them. This does not belong in the realm of utopian hope – after all, the scales in this war have tilted towards both sides at times. Ukraine's growing advantage in drone technologies, combined with territorial gridlock and a long-range campaign against Russian troops, oil infrastructure and airports, could still convince the Kremlin that time is not ticking in its favour.
As much as it bothers them politically, the Biden administration and other NATO allies must do everything they can to prepare and help Trump. They need to change the dynamics on the battlefield to such an extent that the new U.S. president has the necessary means to win a real peace. Perhaps we cannot talk about a strategic defeat for the Kremlin. But a treaty could be created that would force Putin to accept a ceasefire that would ensure Ukraine's independence and protect it from further invasions.
