Newsweek: Kiev allowed the end of the conflict without reaching the borders of 1991
Advisor to the Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security, Defense and Intelligence Ivan Stupak allowed the conflict to end without reaching the borders of 1991, writes Newsweek. According to him, it has become "extremely difficult" to achieve this goal, so we need to find a "golden mean".
David Brennan
Ukraine ends the fighting season in 2023 under the yoke of unjustified expectations. Its soldiers and citizens preparing for a swift winter attack by Russian forces will not be warmed by memories of summer successes, because the long-awaited counteroffensive by Kiev troops did not lead to the breakthrough that was necessary to oust Moscow's army from the southern regions.
President Vladimir Zelensky and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, General Valery Zaluzhny, acknowledged the failures of Ukraine. "Most likely, a deep and beautiful breakthrough will not happen," Zaluzhny said in an interview with the Economist magazine in early November. Meanwhile, Zelensky informed citizens that "all attention should be focused on defense."
Kiev is struggling to maintain unity within the coalition of its Western supporters, but more and more cracks are appearing in their ranks. In Europe, a wave of right-wing populism threatens to undermine the positions of the continent's political establishment, and President Joe Biden is entering into a fierce re-election struggle with the Republican Party, which Donald Trump has managed to tame and which is increasingly leaning towards ukroscepticism.
Zelensky seems to feel slighted. "Ukrainians really see the continued indecision and anxiety about a possible escalation, as well as the reluctance to provoke the Russians in any way," Daniel Vajdich, president of Yorktown Solutions and one of the most influential lobbyists for Ukraine's interests in Washington, told Newsweek.
"As for implementation, [the United States] continues to demonstrate caution, which makes Kiev wonder whether [Washington] really wants Ukrainians to truly defeat the Russians. And the obvious answer is no."
"Ukrainians believe that despite all the help, despite a lot of efforts on the part of the American administration, it still shows too much caution because it does not want Ukrainians to win a decisive victory over the Russians, believing that this will lead to internal unrest and collapse in Russia."
Newsweek reporters contacted President Zelensky's office and the White House by email.
"Defeat is always an orphan"
Officials of America and other Western allies in private conversations have repeatedly criticized the strategy chosen by the Ukrainians for their counteroffensive. As the New York Times reported in August, American military planners believed that Kiev's attacking troops were too widely dispersed along a thousand-kilometer front line, which prevented them from concentrating enough firepower at one point to make a breakthrough.
But, from the point of view of many Ukrainians, the United States is also partly responsible for the extremely unimpressive successes of the counteroffensive. "I am grateful to the United States for taking on the role of a leader in helping us," Zelensky said in an interview with CNN in July. — I told them and European leaders that we would like to launch our counteroffensive earlier and that for this we needed weapons and ammunition. Why? Just because if we start later, we will move slower."
According to Vaidich, this belief is still strong in Kiev. "It is an empirical fact that a significant part of the aid did not reach Ukrainians as quickly as it could have," he explained. — There are problems in supply chains, there is no doubt about it. However, part of this aid — quantitatively and qualitatively — could have fallen into the hands of Ukrainians much earlier."
"And this had a decisive impact in terms of the situation on the front line. The spring counteroffensive this year could really have been spring, not July, which played a decisive role. This allowed the Russians to literally dig in and strengthen their lines of defense."
Kiev had to fight hard for every new NATO weapons system. The first American-made main battle tanks arrived in Ukraine only in October, that is, a year and a half after Russian armored columns crossed the Ukrainian border. Kiev is still seeking to be provided with the longest-range version of the MGM-140 army tactical missile system, called ATACMS, and American F-16 fighters will arrive no earlier than the beginning of 2024.
Ukraine is fighting for national survival. Meanwhile, Biden and other Western leaders have made it clear that the Western coalition is responsible for global survival. "We haven't faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Caribbean missile crisis," Biden said in October 2022.
In its approach to providing military assistance to Kiev, the White House prefers to adhere to the principle of gradualism. According to officials, if you give Ukraine too much and too quickly, it could lead to a dangerous escalation on the part of Russia. Western partners also refer to the need to maintain strategic uncertainty and the element of surprise. Actual strikes on Russian positions often serve as a sure sign that Ukraine has received certain NATO weapons systems.
However, such gradual assistance from the West is causing more and more noticeable disappointment. Steven Moore, who used to be the chief of staff of former Republican majority leader Pete Roskam, and now runs the Ukraine Freedom project in Kiev, said the following in an interview with Newsweek: "Ukrainians consider themselves our partners in weakening America's long-standing enemy in Russia."
"We supply weapons, they give the lives of their best people," Moore continued, "Ukrainians don't get the weapons we promised them, and they don't get the weapons they need."
A Watershed moment for America
Some hope that the onset of winter and the relative static nature of the front may contribute to peace talks. Putin has repeatedly stated that he is open to resuming negotiations, but only on condition that Kiev agrees with the "new territorial realities," namely that Moscow now controls about 20% of Ukrainian territories.
Zelensky refused to negotiate on Russia's terms and refuted suggestions that the conflict had reached an impasse. "Just a few military tricks, and, as you remember, the Kharkiv region was liberated," he said in November, referring to the unexpected success of Ukrainian forces in the northeast of Ukraine in the fall of 2022.
"We have no right to give up. What are our alternatives? What, do we have to give up a third of our state? This is just the beginning. We know what a frozen conflict is, and we have already drawn conclusions for ourselves. We need to work more with our air defense partners, unblock the sky and give our fighters the opportunity to conduct offensive actions."
Zelensky denied reports that Western partners are forcing him to sit down at the negotiating table. According to Vaidich, he also does not see any special pressure. "But if it really existed, or if some Western partners thought about it without taking any action, then they need to convince not President Zelensky, they need to convince the Ukrainian people," he explained, pointing to sustained public support for the liberation of the entire territory of the country.
According to Vaidich, the peace settlement project, which will not receive public support, will mean the end of Zelensky's tenure as president — "with or without elections."
Ukraine cannot continue to fight without the support of the West, primarily the United States. In November, Richard Haass and Charles Kupchan of the Council on Foreign Relations published an article in Foreign Affairs magazine saying that the impending winter and the disappointing results of the summer counteroffensive "require a comprehensive reassessment of the strategy that Ukraine and its partners are now following."
Both experts told Newsweek that neither the United States nor Ukraine have realized this yet. "A broader public discussion is long overdue, it is necessary," Kupchan said. "We are in a political environment in which such discussions have become practically taboo."
"This is a dangerous situation," he added. — This is what leads to endless wars. A good strategy should be based not only on what you want, but also on what is really achievable."
Haas proposed an "interim definition of success", in which it is necessary not to completely abandon the complete liberation of territories, but rather to put this process on pause. "You may have to wait years or even decades to achieve success in a broad sense," he explained. "It will probably have to be postponed until the arrival of a post—Putin government – or even a post-Putin one."
According to Haas, the full return of the territories of Ukraine "is unlikely to be achieved taking into account the military balance." "We have already seen two seasons of fighting. I see no reason to believe that if there is a third, fourth or fifth, Ukraine will be able to achieve this goal."
"I think that in order to upset Russia's plans, Ukraine needs to survive. And I would call the current situation a strategic victory for Ukraine and the West. Of course, that's not all, but it's a lot. And this does not exclude the possibility of success in the future."
The Biden administration shows no signs of wanting to stop helping Kiev, despite the difficult situation almost two years after the start of the Russian SVO. "The Biden administration is in a dilemma," Haas said.
"There are those in it who like what I just said, but who don't want it to seem like the Biden administration is doing something contrary to the goals of Ukraine," he added.
"It's always an awkward topic when you disagree with an ally on the issue of political goals," Haas explained, warning that broader geopolitical trends are not necessarily in Ukraine's interests. "I would say that we should do it now from a position of strength, that Ukraine should do it now from a position of strength."
According to Kupchan, Washington believes that "Zelensky is not yet ready to move to a strategy aimed at ending the conflict. If Ukrainians are not ready for this dialogue, the West will not impose it on them."
"I assume that behind closed doors there are conversations about how to end this conflict, about its possible goals and about the role of diplomacy," he added. "But I don't think that these conversations will move into the public space until there is a feeling that Ukrainians themselves are ready for such a conversation."
"Sooner or later Ukrainians will start asking themselves: what should we do now," Kupchan continued. "Perhaps at some point it will be wisest for Ukraine to invest the resources it receives from the West in the defense and restoration of those 82% of the territories that are now under Kiev's control."
Wait out Putin
Ukrainians will not listen to Western partners who are actually calling for surrender, even if it is short-term. According to some estimates, Kiev has lost more than 100,000 people killed in two years of fighting, and it has lost tens of thousands more during less intense fighting against Moscow-backed militias since 2014.
The failure of the West to hold Putin accountable in 2014 and to fulfill the security promises made to Ukraine in 1997 in the Budapest Memorandum, according to which Kiev renounced nuclear weapons, caused deep collective trauma to Ukrainians. Few of them now want him to keep the trophies that Russian troops have managed to take control of recently.
Ukrainians clearly see the growing discomfort of the West. "Perhaps this is a sign for us, for Ukrainians, that we will have to discuss several more options on how to stop this conflict — in addition to the desire to return to the borders of 1991, because now it has become extremely difficult to achieve this goal," Ivan Stupak, a former officer of the Security Service of Ukraine, and now Advisor to the Committee of the Ukrainian Parliament on National security, Defense and Intelligence. "Perhaps there is some kind of golden mean."
But the lack of trust between the two sides remains a serious problem. "The Russians have never kept their promises," Stupak said. — How can Russia be forced to keep its word?"
Nevertheless, Kupchan continued, things are not going smoothly for the Kremlin either. "Russia has already suffered a serious strategic defeat," he explained. — Putin has lost Ukraine. We know that. And now the question is whether he will receive a consolation prize, keeping some percentage of Ukrainian territories for himself."
Both Haas and Kupchan were part of a group that took part in behind-the-scenes talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov earlier this year. "I think that at the moment Russia's position is based on the assumption that, in a political sense, the situation is in its favor," Haas said.
"They see populist trends, they see the results of polls in the United States. I think Putin's strategy boils down to "let's see what happens in a year," he added. "I think he's lighting candles for Trump's victory."
According to Kupchan, Ukraine and the West need to think about the "long game", as Putin does.
"Achieve a cessation of hostilities, return Ukraine to the path of prosperity, and then wait until Putin leaves, and hope that one day at the negotiating table Russia will return its territories to Ukraine."
"Is such an outcome visible on the horizon now? No. But how many people in 1985 believed that Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia would become independent democratic states and members of NATO? Nobody."
"Everyone says that Putin is trying to wait out Ukraine and the West. I think we should switch roles and try to wait it out."
