In the debates about victory or defeat in the war against Russia, the Ukrainians themselves are overlooked. You need one thing above all: a realistic perspective. Because it is becoming clearer and clearer. The clear and quick victory that they long for, that we in the West want, will not happen under the current conditions.
If you talk to advisers to the Ukrainian president or well-meaning experts here in the West, you will hear this mantra again and again: Ukraine must win this war, Russia must be defeated. Because, as it was recently said in one, for example programmatic text by Nico Lange and Carlo Masala: A victory for Russia would be the end of the world as we know it.
But 21 months after the start of Russia’s major attack on Ukraine, does talking about victory or defeat alone mean we can continue? Don’t we, don’t Ukrainians need more realism?
NATO-Ukraine summit: The West must send a clear message
Above all, we all need a long-term, substantial plan of military and economic aid that makes it clear to Putin: We are realists, but we actually stand with Ukraine in the long term, regardless of a country’s domestic political considerations. At least as far as the military part is concerned, a corresponding signal should come from the NATO-Ukraine summit in Brussels.
Every Ukrainian and most people outside Ukraine would want the Russians to be kicked out of the country, the country’s territorial sovereignty restored, and the attacker punished. But anyone who says what they want should also say how it should work.
At the beginning of the war, there was wishful thinking in Moscow: Kremlin ruler Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine in the belief that the country would collapse within days and that Ukrainians would resign themselves to their fate. The attack was reflected in the heroism of Ukrainians who collectively stood up to the aggressor – and in the Western determination to support Ukraine, which Putin had not expected.
2023 was then characterized by wishful thinking in Ukraine and the West: After Ukraine’s military successes last autumn, people believed that it would be repeated this summer, and some hoped that Ukrainian troops might even advance as far as the Sea of Azov in their long-announced counteroffensive could. The uprising of the Wagner mercenaries in June encouraged many people to think that Russia could collapse.
Now, at the end of November, it is time for us to say goodbye to illusions. For a year now we have seen a war of attrition that produces thousands of deaths and injuries every month but virtually no territorial gains. Heroism no longer helps when enemy drones register every movement and every attempt to attack is drowned in a hail of shells. And clearly there are geopolitical factors that prevent even the strongest military power on the planet, the United States, from supplying the Ukrainians with, for example, stealth bombers that would enable them to crush Russia or at least throw Putin’s troops out of the country .
Trench warfare cannot be won in the long term
This brutal trench warfare, in which the warring opponents decimate each other day after day, cannot be won for Ukraine in the long term. Because, firstly: The fighting is taking place on the territory of Ukraine, where cities, villages and fields are being destroyed. And secondly: With 145 million inhabitants compared to 30 million in the case of Ukraine, Russia can mobilize four to five times as many people for war.
Anyone who drives through Ukraine in these days of approaching winter and doesn’t cover their eyes and ears will feel how the mood is changing. Most of the graves in military cemeteries come from this year, not the one before, but where are the successes? People are increasingly asking themselves: Where is this going? In parts of the country, employees of the military offices now grab the men on the streets and at the train station – two days later they are in the army. These are methods that are increasingly reminiscent of those used by the war enemy.
No, no one in Ukraine wants to throw themselves at the feet of the Russians. But almost two years of a ban on leaving the country for men of military age, millions of refugees, thousands of prisoners of war, an economic crisis, a war with unclear prospects, all of this means that things begin to boil in this cauldron, which has been covered with a lid for 21 months. Conflicts within society are increasing, and Zelensky’s poll numbers have also fallen sharply recently. For several weeks now, scenarios that are not based on a restoration of the Ukrainian borders from 1991 have been discussed in the country itself.
We’re not doing the Ukrainians any favors today by being loud-mouthed like that British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak recently talked about “victory” again. Communication from the USA, Ukraine’s most important supporter, has recently changed significantly: “We are focused on creating the conditions for a just, lasting and sustainable peace,” wrote the US Embassy to NATO a few days ago. “We will continue to support them (the Ukrainians) to put them in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table when the time comes.”
The truth is: this war will most likely end in some kind of draw, with a freeze on the front line and a sophisticated political formula regarding the status of the Russian-occupied territories. The more Ukrainians the bone mills in Bakhmut and Avdiivka eat up by then, the worse it will be for the country. The craftsmen who are needed to rebuild the country after the end of the war are dying there today.
Zelensky should pour pure wine
We should therefore send a signal to Putin with a long-term plan for training soldiers and supplying military supplies to Ukraine: This is no longer possible for him. It should be a plan that is realistic, that can survive political turbulence, and that can be pursued regardless of whether a government that shows little interest in the well-being of Ukraine comes to power in one or another Western country.
At the same time, President Zelenskyj should start giving his citizens pure wine: the big and quick victory they dreamed of will not happen. After his historic achievement of uniting the country in resistance against the aggressor, making painful compromises and thus showing a path towards peace could be his second great achievement. Even if it’s a bad one.