Every time the US faces an external political crisis, critics argue that the US government is either doing too much or not doing enough.. This also happened in the case of the war in Ukraine.. Many blame the Joe Biden administration for failing to provide the Ukrainian army with the heavy weapons, tanks, long-range missiles, and planes it needs to drive Russian troops out of Ukrainian territory..

Others are concerned about the resilience of the West and the increasing economic and human cost of the war.. So they are calling on the administration to put pressure on Kyiv to negotiate a peace deal with Russia, even if it means giving up its territory.. None of the positions are persuasive.. Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder and Stanford University Center for International Security and Cooperation researcher James Goldgeier write about this in an article for Foreign Affairs..

The Ukrainian army surprised everyone with its ability to defend the country and even regain control over a significant part of the territory lost at the beginning of the war.. But driving Russian troops out of all regions, including Crimea, will be extremely difficult, even with more military help from the West.. To achieve such a result, it is necessary that the fortified and reinforced Russian defense positions fall apart. And there will also be a risk of a direct war between NATO and Russia. This is the critical scenario that everyone wants to avoid..

[see_also ids\u003d"

As for the talks, Russian President Vladimir Putin has not signaled any willingness to abandon his imperialist dream of taking control of Ukraine.. And it is just as difficult to convince the Ukrainian government to give up territories in favor of a cruel occupier in exchange for an unstable peace..

“Given the strong initiative on both sides to continue fighting, a third outcome is more likely: a protracted, exhausting war that will gradually become frozen with a front line that will not be acceptable to either side,” the authors say..

History refutes the idea that wars always end either in victory or in a negotiated settlement.. In particular, the existence of numerous frozen conflicts along the Russian border can serve as an argument.. Ukraine itself is a very clear proof that this is not so.. Despite years of peace efforts, the war in Donbass was frozen for 8 years, after which Russia launched a large-scale invasion in February 2022. And the current war, according to Daalder and Goldgeer, may turn out to be exactly the same. After more than 10 months of heavy fighting and months of punitive attacks on civilians, the Ukrainian government will not accept Russian control of any Ukrainian territory.. Especially after all the robberies, rapes and murders in the occupied territories. But Russia is also unlikely to voluntarily return Ukrainian regions that it mistakenly calls Russian..

The authors acknowledge that so far, Washington and its allies have rightly focused on the urgent task of helping Ukraine and avoiding escalation..

“But there is an urgent need to look at the long term and develop a policy towards Ukraine and Russia based on a new reality in which this war will continue for quite some time.. Instead of believing that war can end either in victory or through negotiation, the West needs to accept a world in which conflict continues with no victory or peace on the horizon.. In such a world, the US and allies will have to continue providing Ukraine with military support to defend against Russian aggression.. They will need to contain Russia's grand ambitions by maintaining economic sanctions and isolating Moscow in the diplomatic arena..

The West also needs to ensure that the war does not escalate and lay a long-term foundation for security and stability in Europe.. This will require the full integration of Ukraine with the West, as well as the creation of a policy of containment that will deter Russian aggression and involve engagement with Moscow to avoid escalating into a wider confrontation that no one wants.. Balancing Ukrainian politics and Russian politics will be a long-term challenge. But both initiatives will be important for the future of European security..

No victory, no peace.

Russian war against Ukraine was full of surprises. Although the Biden administration released intelligence about Moscow's preparations for an invasion, many were shocked when Russia ordered more than 175,000 troops to attack a neighboring country that did no harm or threatened Russian security in any way.. And even for those who foresaw a large-scale invasion, things did not go as expected.. Many were surprised that Russia was unable to quickly take control of Ukraine and overthrow its government..

[see_also ids\u003d"

The authors also recall the serious victories of the Ukrainian army in the fall of 2022. However, the dynamics of the war have changed in recent months.. Ukraine entered 2023 exhausted and beaten, not least because of constant Russian rocket attacks on energy networks and other civilian infrastructure.. It was reported that the losses of Russia exceeded 100 thousand soldiers. But at the same time, a large number of Ukrainian military and civilians were also killed.. Moreover, unlike the first 10 months of the war, major changes in the current line of confrontation should not be expected in the coming months..

First of all, because Russia does not have enough manpower and equipment to go on the offensive in the near future. And her strikes with missiles and drones only strengthened the Ukrainian desire to resist.. At the same time, it is becoming increasingly difficult for Ukraine to break through Russian defenses, while paying an acceptable price..

“The Ukrainian army can continue to carry out successful offensive operations in certain sectors of the front, for example, in the south in the direction of Melitopol and the Sea of \u200b\u200bAzov. But unless the Russian defense collapses completely, Ukraine will not have the manpower to hold onto these gains for long without running the risk of launching Russian counterattacks elsewhere,” the authors write..

Since autumn, strategists in the West have been trying to prevent the continuation of the military confrontation in two ways.. Some, among them the leaders of the Baltic states, called for arming Kyiv with heavier weapons needed to drive Russian forces from Ukrainian territory.. Others, including Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, advised Ukraine to start negotiations that would not give a complete victory, but at least stop the bloodshed.. None of these options had a chance of success..

[see_also ids\u003d"

Daalder and Goldgeer explain that the ability of Washington and its allies to transfer weapons is rather limited.. This is partly due to the fact that even the US is running out of surplus stocks to supply Ukraine.. An example is artillery shells.. Ukraine uses as much in a week as the US can produce in a month. The same deficit persists for other types of advanced weapons.. Germany sent the IRIS-T air defense system in October. But it is difficult for her to provide Ukraine with the necessary number of missiles for these weapons..

"

In addition to supply limits, Washington and allies are hesitant to transfer certain types of weapons to Ukraine because it would require a very long preparation process or because there is a possibility of such weapons falling into Russian hands.. F-16 aircraft belong to the first category. The second is the advanced attack drones Gray Eagle.. If the Russian military can capture such a vehicle, it will give Russia important information about American military capabilities and technologies.. The West also assesses the threat of escalation. Therefore, Ukraine has not yet received ATACMS missiles with a range of up to 300 kilometers, which could destroy targets in Russia.. The undeniable reality is that Ukrainian and American interests in response to Russian aggression do not always coincide..

Naturally, the Pentagon and the White House are constantly reviewing Ukrainian needs and what the US can do to meet them.. In the end, Kyiv was denied the supply of long-range artillery and advanced Patriot-type systems.. But the situation has changed. Now the United States and France intend to send an infantry fighting vehicle to the Ukrainian army.

“But although these weapons and equipment will help Ukraine, they are unlikely to change the balance of power on the battlefield enough to end the war,” the authors say..

[see_also ids\u003d"

But if a complete military victory for Ukraine seems unlikely in the near term, the chances of a negotiated peace are even slimmer.. Vladimir Putin constantly talks about his readiness to conduct a dialogue “with all participants in the process about an acceptable result,” but he is not sincere. Daalder and Goldgeer recall Russia's territorial encroachments, which Ukraine simply cannot agree to for the sake of peace. In turn, Zelensky insists that the Ukrainian borders should be the same as in 1991.. And no one in the West can change this position of Kyiv.

Best Long Game.

Since absolute victory or peace through negotiations is not possible in the short term, the war will continue. Russia strengthens its line of defense along a 1,000-kilometer front. Both armies will look for weaknesses. But without a wider collapse of the defense of one of the parties, the line of collision, according to the authors, will remain more or less in its current form..

“The exhaustion and lack of manpower and equipment can even lead to the beginning of a long pause in the fighting or the emergence of agreements on the disengagement of forces or a ceasefire, at least temporarily.. Not all wars end in a permanent peace settlement. Korean War ended with a truce. And the Yom Kippur War in 1973 led to the " For Russia, frozen conflicts are also nothing new,” write Daalder and Goldgeer, referring to Georgia and Moldova..

If this is the bleak future for Ukraine, the West will need a multi-faceted, long-term strategy that supports Ukraine's future but also allows cooperation with Russia where interests overlap..

“While it is difficult to imagine cooperation with Putin and his regime, the West will not have much of a choice for a long time to come.. Accumulation of setbacks in this war has weakened Putin. But he concentrated power in his hands for 22 years, trying to make sure that no one could successfully challenge him.. A revolution is also unlikely, given Moscow's ability to continue its repression against the Russian people.. Even if Putin is eliminated, his successor could be someone who shares his views on Great Russia and believes that Putin was not tough enough..

The authors also remind that despite Putin's brutality, Kyiv and Washington have been in contact with Moscow since the beginning of the war.. Ukraine and Russia are negotiating the exchange of prisoners.

[see_also ids\u003d"

With the help of Turkey and the UN, they concluded a grain agreement that unlocked Ukrainian food exports.. In a long war strategy, the West will have to strengthen such contacts, even if there are few points to reach an agreement with Russia..

Daalder and Goldgeer believe that an effective approach would also require the West to continue to provide Ukraine with significant support in defending the territory it now controls, as well as in trying to liberate other regions when possible..

“As Ukraine seeks to tie its economic future to the EU over time, the US and NATO nations will need to offer security commitments to ensure Ukraine has the necessary weapons to defend itself against Russia for a long time to come.. This is what America did for Israel. Washington should also explore expanding its promised EU membership to Ukraine by further joining NATO..

At the same time, Western leaders will have to return to containing the Russian threat.. This means that all financial, trade and economic sanctions imposed since 2014 must remain in place.. Efforts to reduce dependence on Russian energy exports also need to be continued.. And everything possible will have to be done to close Moscow's access to the technologies necessary to support the Russian economy and defense sector..

[see_also ids\u003d"

Effective long-term deterrence will also require maintaining Russia's political isolation. Exclusion of the country from sporting and cultural events will help reinforce this isolation, as will the votes in the UN General Assembly that showed no one supports the illegal war against Ukraine.. But the West will need to make more concrete efforts to demonstrate to countries in the global South that side with Moscow or remain neutral that the Russian side is undermining the foundations of peace and security that underpin the international order.. This does not mean that all countries should support the economic strategy of the West.. But they need to be convinced that Russia is to blame and its behavior is the main cause of their economic problems..

Finally, containing Russia will require the West to take a strong position not only in defense against military threats, but also against threats to its institutions and society.. This means that Europe will have to increase defense spending more significantly than it promised after the Russian aggression in 2014..

[see_also ids\u003d"

The U.S.

will have to get involved in European affairs, even at a time when it is doing more and more to meet challenges from China.. In addition, NATO and EU countries should step up their individual and collective efforts to crack down on Russian interference in their elections.. They must also respond decisively to attempts at economic intimidation, political interference, and other methods of hybrid warfare.. Despite the fact that the Russian army has been weakened, Moscow remains a big threat to the West.