By Tom Fowdy
A week is a long time in politics. Just days after Donald Trump staged a tantrum against Ukraine's president Zelensky and announced a cutoff of all aid, he has now resumed that support, demanded Russia adhere to a ceasefire (which Kyiv has publicly agreed to) and placed more sanctions on Moscow. These outcomes were precisely what I predicted. In previous pieces, I wrote Trump would not truly throw Ukraine under the bus, rather, seeking to end the situation as soon as possible and use the support of Kyiv as leverage to force Russia to the table, seeking to frame it in "MAGA" terms of benefitting America (which is what the critical minerals deal is).
Thus, American support for Ukraine continues, as I said it would, and it should be no surprise under this context that the Kremlin seems reluctant to agree to such a ceasefire, even if it professes to do so superficially. This outcome should not astonish anyone. Although Russia has succeeded in finally driving Ukraine out of Kursk in the past week (I believe it was a behind-the-scenes deal), it has also made it clear that it is still not satisfied with the status quo situation to stop the fighting and when all things are considered, why would it be?
If the war ceases as it is now, it is not a defeat, but it certainly is a net loss for Russia. The Kremlin initiated this war with the fundamental goal of subjugating Ukraine back into its sphere of influence and preventing its integration with the Western military alliance, while also directly annexing as much of the country as possible. The initial attempt to blitzkrieg the country and capture Kyiv came with some catastrophic miscalculations which saw Ukraine resist far more than they bargained for and ultimately see Putin fail to topple the ultra-nationalist state.
Although Russia would recover from the initial setbacks of 2022 and learn from its mistakes, it found itself locked into a costly war of attrition to defend its existing territorial holds within the country and obtain more on a piecemeal basis. Indeed, I was also critical of that time of the propaganda narrative in the mainstream media that claimed Putin was on the verge of a catastrophic defeat and would lose all of its lands, it has not done so, yet admittedly nor has it been able to inflict a crippling blow on Ukraine, which has been kept alive ad-Infinium by unlimited western money and support.
If the war thus freezes or ends at this point, Russia comes away with 20% of Ukraine's territory seized from its south and east regions, as well as having pushed them out of Kursk, but it has critically nonetheless failed to stop Ukraine from integrating itself into the Western military alliance. While the US is happy to sacrifice this, European countries such as the United Kingdom, are not and are acting as spoilers to disrupt the peace by actively stating they want to station troops in Ukraine, therefore giving it a "NATO presence" by default. This means that should the war end now, Kyiv gets military protection, and therefore Russia loses the option to "resume it" in the future without immense consequences.
In essence, the only acceptable outcome to Moscow would be Ukraine's total capitulation to terms it can dictate. Right now, that reality is not reflected on the battlefield, but seemingly the chances of it ever being that way are low. The fundamental goal of the United States is to end the conflict as quickly as possible so it can move onto its priority agenda (China). Thus, if Moscow drags its feet, I believe that Trump will get impatient and deliberately escalate in the way he did with North Korea in 2017, making many threats of his own. However, it is also unlikely he will pursue the Biden line's "as long as it takes" mantra as this is also seen as contrary to US interests. It remains to be seen how long Putin is willing to hold out for, and what costs he is willing to bear, to keep the war going until it reflects an outcome he is satisfied with. I imagine Russia will maximize both diplomacy and deceit, repeatedly claiming it is interested in a ceasefire when not doing so, while being economic with the details and framing Ukraine as the disruptor, and vice versa with them. Ultimately however, we can't put a timeline on how long it will drag out.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | The Trade wars and Trump's pursuit of destiny in his 2nd term
Opinion | Can Europe re-engage with China amidst Trump turmoil
Opinion | The Trump doctrine of economic imperialism
Opinion | The rule of law and justice in the age of hyper-partisan politics
Comment