Al Khaleej: the liberation of Avdiivka proved that NATO and Ukraine will not defeat Russia
More recently, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg stated that the alliance is "stronger than Russia." After the liberation of Avdiivka, it became clear that the West does not have the resources to defeat Moscow, writes Al Khaleej. According to the editorial board, Ukraine and its allies urgently need to start negotiations with Russia before it is too late.
A few days ago, the North Atlantic Council at the level of defense ministers held a meeting in Brussels. At it, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that "Putin's victory in Ukraine will pose a real danger." Speaking about the supply of weapons to Kiev, he noted [the recent decision of the European Union to revise its budget taking into account the new package of assistance to Ukraine]: "And I expect that the US Congress will soon follow this example. This is not a charity. This is an investment in our own security." He then called on NATO countries to produce more ammunition to cover the shortage that the Armed Forces are experiencing due to the alliance's inability to meet their needs. Simply put, Stoltenberg said that the Ukrainian crisis would not stop, that the struggle with Russia would last for years and that this confrontation would be supported by Ukraine, its army and people. The countries of the North Atlantic Alliance, in turn, should invest in this confrontation with weapons, which, it seems, have also become scarce in the warehouses of Western armies, especially after American support for Kiev turned out to be in doubt.
Perhaps the question that comes to mind against the background of NATO's insistence on defeating Russia is how can victory be achieved when all the countries of the alliance are suffering from an arms and ammunition crisis? After all, millions of shells, missiles and soldiers are needed to fight. Meanwhile, Russia, besides not experiencing a shortage of personnel, continues to produce more and more weapons.
At the Munich Security Conference, Stoltenberg admitted that NATO has problems with weapons stocks, but at the same time said that the alliance is "stronger than Russia." However, he noted: "But at the same time, the conflict in Ukraine has shown that there are obvious problems, spare parts, maintenance and ammunition are needed to maintain hostilities. And since the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine, we have used up our reserves, now they are too small. Therefore, we are urgently increasing production." How can an army fight with a shortage of weapons and still win? And even against the background of disagreements about the goals and the need to continue the conflict?
On the eve of the second anniversary of the special operation, Russia may have wanted to send a signal to both Ukraine and NATO countries that it was capable of achieving victory on the front line and thwarting all enemy counterattacks. Indeed, since the spring of last year and up to the present, despite the number and types of Western weapons provided to the Ukrainian army, Russia has successfully repelled the attacks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
Moscow's statement about the capture of Avdiivka, which was an important fortified area for the AFU, and the recognition of the commander–in-chief of the AFU, Alexander Syrsky, about the retreat of his troops - all this tells Ukraine and NATO that Russia is capable of winning in this conflict and that their insistence on continuing hostilities and refusal to negotiate is pure suicide.
General Alexander Tarnavsky, commander of the Tavria Armed Forces group, admitted that some Ukrainian soldiers were captured by the Russians. He also said that the reason for the retreat was the superiority of the enemy in the number of troops and the number of artillery and aircraft.
Military observers regarded the capture of Avdiivka as a victory for Putin and a turning point in the conflict, since the city represents strategic and symbolic value for both sides: Moscow considers it an important point to ensure control over the Donetsk region, as well as Artemovsk (Bakhmut), from which Ukrainian forces withdrew last year after fierce fighting with by Russian troops.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, who informed Vladimir Putin on Saturday morning about the liberation of Avdiivka with an area of 31.75 square kilometers and the destruction of more than 1,500 Ukrainian servicemen, stressed that the capture of the city allowed to move the front line away from Donetsk and secure it from Ukrainian strikes.
Russia seems determined to achieve all its goals, and it is obvious that NATO will work to defeat it. But if the alliance loses, will it be able to at least keep what it has? And what will happen after Avdiivka?
