Putin has committed the greatest strategic blunder of this century. Regrettably, my country's current government seems determined to offer him a reprieve.
The question is why?
Maybe exactly in that rests the answer of alleged Russian "success"?
What I dont know, is this - has the US policy under president Trump lead to this, or has the Russia position and exploits of this conflict led to this change in American policy?
What comes first, chicken or egg question?
It is very hard to navigate between propaganda from both sides. (there is no moderate articulated analytic view in any of main stream press).
We will, however, agree that US still stands as Worlds global, economic leader and global military superpower no 1 and wherever America is heading this will determine the global future. (even if that means "russian victory")
So. "Quo Vadis America"? "Quo Vadis Mundus"?
National security strategy of USA for 2025 is one document worth looking at. Public and downloadable document.
Few days ago, I took an effort to pass through it. 30-ish pages.
Here are some highlights:
US will not waste blood and treasure just about everywhere. (Ukraine included?).
"The outsized influence of larger, richer and stronger nations is timeless truth."
"the nations" are in plural. This leads me to believe of announcement of forthcoming multipolar world, recognition of the fact, or acceptance of it.
The way how I read it, is:
"the war is going nowhere, and has to be stopped.
Ukraine is not backing down, and Russia is not backing down. For both of them this is the last stand. As much as we admire Ukraine bravery and human efforts and sacrifices, keep in mind Russians have the same culture, same religion (ortodox), joint history with Ukraine and same stubbornness.
But Russia has more recourses and manpower.
When the war started in Ukraine - I vividely remember my comment then (easy to find here on the forum) I said that is going to be total humanitarian disaster.
I think I was not wrong in that. It is sufficient to take a look in Ukraine demographic curve - available on internet, and estimate what will happen in next few years if the war continues. The curve is close to vertical downwards, with refugees, casualties, birth and death rates.
Continuation of war is suicidal for Ukraine. And financially suicidal for EU if they persist in the present policies. (next year another 90 billion of credit, and year after again, etc?)
In order to stop it, Russias security interests will have to be recognized, in order to create stability in Europe. Nobody wants trigger happy Russia.
In other words, some agreements and treaties will have to be signed with Russia. Sooner or later. This is also very hard to even imagine on European side, because this may include integration of Russia into some European security infrastructure, acceptable deals for both sides - which most likely will include limitations and clearly defined positioning of missile basis, hypersonic weapons etc. This also sounds like Nato expansion is stopped. (but what do I know)
Or making new iron curtain, as it was before.
If this new US national security strategy persists - this will mean territorial and political targets are achieved by Russia - - East of Ukraine gone to Russia (with no meaningful force to kick them out), and "denazification and demilitarization" - defined in legal clauses including military limitations, in post war treaties.
Lets keep in mind that wars are won (or lost) by all means necessary, diplomatic, political, economic, legal or military.
To sign a treaty, there must be diplomacy involved and dialogue started.
While USA is doing something on that. Europe does not. They still did not recognize the need for diplomacy, trying to pull the USA into the war (which is now opposite to new US security strategy, and which most likely will not happen).
From the perspective of new strategy, there are also shared values to take a look at.
"Shared values", are more serious issue then it sounds.
USA is moving away from DEI policies, and actively stopping immigration crises on US soil. It is described in the document.
As opposed to still flourishing EU policies on the same. (Dei paradise and Immigrant welcome policy)
Although not directly connected to war efforts presently on going in eastern europe, this marks the breaking point from Americas and Europes "shared values", better to say - "main stream shared values", because there are many European conservatives thinking the same, but they are presently kept in political opposition, not being in elected circles of power yet.
This further applies directly to some allied countries who will have to take a deep look into it, in determining their future policies.
This sounds like a "not alliance for ever". From the strategy:
Interestingly, the countries described in this quote are the countries that form the core of the coalition of the willing, the most pro war countries in the Nato,(Germany, UK, France). Coincidence or not?
This brings up one more question, why and how the Nato umbrella has created the conditions to form the Coalition of the willing? Where is the need for it? Different interests maybe?
There are other alliances less mentioned in media, for example: Serbia (Non EU, Non NAto) military partnership with Hungary (EU and NAto country), and another one: Croatia - Kosovo - Albania - Bulgaria (countries effectively encircling Serbia). What if this becomes warlike kinetic?
Serbia has issue with Kosovo, and Serbia is building a pipeline to bring the russian oil or gas to Hungary. That is the "situation".
Anyway. Back to Russia and the global trends.
My estimate is that America took another course, 180 degrees from the old one.
Main stream Europe is running with previous (or obsolete) political inertia (with financial engine on idle), and will have to stop at one point, with no money to finance the war. They just took another credit - 90 billion euros. This with present costs can run another year of war. (Ukranian estimates of daily costs of war are 170 million per day, probably all inclusive corruption included)
Is president Trump wrong in his course, or he is actually a visionary preparing the America for new multipolar world, we will see. But this is how it looks like now.
President Trump has still a bit more of three years of the term to do. A sensitive midterm elections to survive, and I suppose the last two years of his term will be more practically articulated. But we will see. But how it looks like from this perspective, things are not bad for Russia. And moreover, historically not uncommon.
Historically Russia and America have been allies (WW1, WW2), Sold Alaska to USA in 19 century, and helped american revolution, only with temporary breaking apart during communist era and cold war.
But Russia is not communist country any more.
They are the largest country in the World, with large natural resources, rare earths, access to Arctic, has northern sea passage route control, developed industry, science, technology, and for long term global future the world (and America) cannot afford to keep Russia isolated.
Now lets see what happens in next three years.
