“The wind is blowing against Ukraine: It is widely expected that this summer the Russians will deliver a fatal military blow, seizing additional strategic lands and consolidating their gains.” (Photo: AA)
Everyone in the West, from NATO to the European Union, from Biden to Scholz, is praising Ukraine’s heroic resistance against Russia as the war enters its third year, adding new ones to the unfulfilled promises of weapons and money.
But things are not getting any better on the military front. It is widely expected that this summer the Russians will deliver a fatal military blow, seizing additional strategic lands and consolidating their gains. Some proposals are being circulated regarding a peace process within the framework of declaring a ceasefire, albeit temporary, that would satisfy both parties as soon as possible, and preserve the current status quo.
At a time when war weariness is reaching its peak, we have developed some ideas to contribute to such a process that will create a sense of victory on both sides and that public opinion will have difficulty opposing.
In the period elapsed since Ukraine’s independence in 1991, Crimea was annexed ten years ago, the Donbas region was largely taken away two years ago, the eastern part of the country, its infrastructure has been in ruins, hundreds of thousands of people were lost, many more were injured, and more than 10 million people were displaced from their homes. A country that has been conquered and a people who are still fighting bravely to establish their territorial integrity, sovereignty and protect their honour, despite all the difficulties.
Behind Ukraine, where more than 40 million people live and a turbulent history was experienced with Russia, is the West, which constantly gasses Ukraine to push Moscow back, but does not intervene directly in the war, contents itself with sending weapons and money, and is settling scores with Russia for its own strategic global interests.
China, on the other hand, quietly supports its strategic partner Russia, but does not get involved much because it has much deeper interests and conflicts with the West.
It is not easy to understand the current situation if we look at the issue solely in terms of tensions between the Russian-speaking east and the mostly Ukrainian-speaking western regions. This is an oversimplification that masks different and more subtle lines of distinction.
What we are actually experiencing is an unfortunate war waged on the back of Ukraine, which is a border country in the showdown between the great powers of the “Cold Peace” era, with the aim of surrounding Russia and, in the final analysis, neutralizing Moscow’s “backyard” in the new global equation. In this game, Russia, Ukraine and the EU seem to be losing, while the USA is gaining upper hands.
Nothing is going as planned or calculated, neither for Ukraine, Russia nor the EU.
Unfortunately, the wind of war blows against Ukraine every day, no matter which side you look at it. Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has a historical background (I recommend you watch the movie “Harvest”), but it started in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea (gifted to Ukraine by Stalin, where the Russian navy is based in the Black Sea). Then the exhausting Donbas war in the east of the country broke out. Before that, there was the occupation of Georgia’s South Ossetia and Abkhazia regions by Russia for similar reasons.
Despite all the extraordinary efforts in the intervening period, Ukraine’s defensive successes and the retreat of the Russian navy in the Black Sea were not enough to change the battle course in its favour.
On the contrary, Russia has started to operate its own domestic arms industry at full capacity and has been purchasing weapons and ammunition from Iran, North Korea and China without interruption.
Russia does not hide that it will launch a major ruthless attack in the summer.
However, arms shipments and economic aid are not flowing from the West to Ukraine as promised. Commanders in the armed forces are constantly changing. Bribery and corruption have not decreased; on the contrary, it is not clear where the Western aid is going.
Western sanctions, of course, hurt Moscow in the beginning, but Russia, which has the world’s largest natural resources and does not have problems with import substitution, diversified its trade partners and routes and made heavy discounts on its prices, turning towards Asia-Pacific countries rather than the West. EU countries, on the other hand, could not show the same agility. They had to pay exorbitant prices when finding sources outside Russia. Their economies are heating up under inflationary pressure.
In the all-out counterattack in the summer of 2023, which was launched with great hopes, Ukraine could not change the front line stretching for nearly a thousand kilometers in its favour, and the clashes came to a standstill. There were even retreats.
The lack of progress has led to a frustrating rift between President Zelensky and the head of his armed forces, Valerii Zaluzhnyi. The now-deposed General Zaluzhnyi is seen as a potential political rival to his former boss.
Approximately 18 percent of Ukraine is currently occupied by Russia.
If the war continues, it seems that support from the West will not increase, on the contrary, it will decrease. Maybe bordering EU countries (Poland, Czech Republic and Baltic states) can continue their support, but if the UK, Germany and France are not strongly involved, this support will be insignificant. Especially if Trump is elected in the presidential elections in November 2024,, Ukraine will find itself in a more difficult situation and support will decrease.
It is difficult to estimate the number of civilians and military personnel injured or killed during the ongoing war. It is kept like a “state secret”. It is estimated in different reports that 70 thousand Ukrainian soldiers were killed and 120 thousand soldiers were injured. It is stated that Russian losses were higher. According to some reports, by August 2023, there were 120 thousand Russian soldiers killed nd 180 thousand soldiers injured.
A bill has been prepared to reduce the military conscription age in Ukraine from 27 to 25. People who fight without a break are very tired. The average age of frontline soldiers is now around 43. Therefore, Kiev faces the dilemma of how to send fresh soldiers to the front without sacrificing the youth on whom its demographic future depends.
The victims of war are not only those killed and wounded on both sides of the front. More than 10 million Ukrainians were forced to leave their homes. About 6.4 million of them are refugees abroad, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
The leading countries hosting Ukrainian refugees in Europe are Germany (1.1 million), Poland (957 thousand) and Czech Republic (376 thousand). Additionally, 3.7 million Ukrainians have been displaced within their own country.
In order to avoid war in Russia, many people of military age fled abroad. The wealthy are fleeing both Putin’s regime and the danger of war to places outside Western countries where they are not wanted. During my last visit, I witnessed a significant Russian influx in Thailand too.
Zelensky, a former comedy actor, was at the height of his popularity at the beginning of the war, both at home and on the international stage. But the problems within the country and the prolongation of the war are wearing him out, too. He dismissed the chief of general staff, and cases of bribery and corruption are escalating to levels worse than before the war. The people are tired of war, the number of people who do not want to join the military is increasing. Most of the infrastructure has been destroyed and cannot be quickly renewed or repaired. Communication, transportation and energy lines are paralyzed.
The $60 billion promised to Kiev is still blocked in the US Congress due to the veto of Republican representatives. Military aid is also below expectations and does not include advanced weapons. There is a significant difference between what is promised and the assistance provided. It is not known whether the EU’s 50 billion euro commitment, which has been discussed for a long time since June 2023 and was only recently approved, will be realized.
Those who expect Ukraine’s complete military victory over Russia must be living on another planet. There are those who dream that Russia can be defeated with long-range missile bombardment or even driven out of Crimea. Yes, the Ukrainians have had some notable successes against the Russian Black Sea Fleet, but to retake Crimea they will need to be able to carry out a major amphibious landing, an extraordinarily difficult operation well beyond ship and man capacity. Considering Russia’s size and resources, Ukrainian attacks on Russian infrastructure remain very small at the current stage.
A few months ago, we organized a meeting in London, jointly with the Ukraine CEO Club, on the reconstruction of energy and infrastructure in post-war Ukraine, and the honorary speaker was Boris Johnson, one of the leaders who gave the strongest support to Kiev since the beginning of the war. With a hawkish approach, he called for the war to continue until the last Russian soldier left Crimea and Donbas. “How would this happen?” I asked but he left my question unanswered. It is easy to say from our soft seats, “Fight until Russia is defeated.”
There are those who express the hope that the Ukrainians can remain on the defensive this year, inflict losses on the Russians, and launch a successful new counteroffensive in 2025 if more Western weapons and money are provided. But it depends on how the Russians play the game. Of course, their hands will not pick pears.
Russia has drawn the Ukrainians into protracted battles for small territories like Avdiivka, where they rely on superiority in artillery and ammunition to wear them down through constant bombardment. Partly with the help of Iran, Russia can now deploy large numbers of drones.
For the Ukrainians to win, military history shows they will need a 3-to-2 advantage in manpower and much more firepower.
Ukraine enjoyed these advantages in the first year of the war, but now Russia’s hand is stronger and it is very difficult for Ukraine to regain what it has lost.
The Biden Administration is entirely correct to warn that without more U.S. military aid, the Ukrainian resistance will likely collapse this year. But U.S. officials also need to recognize that even if this aid continues, Ukraine’s chances of achieving complete victory next year or the year after that are unrealistic.
If there is to be a successful peace process, it is undoubtedly necessary for Ukraine and the West to accept some painful concessions. The peace agreement would require Putin to abandon the plan with which he started the war, his ambition to turn all of Ukraine into a Russian client state, and to recognize Ukraine’s territorial integrity.
The lost Ukrainian lands were lost. NATO membership and an Article 5-like guarantee do not really mean much if the alliance is not ready to send its own troops to fight on behalf of Ukraine against Russia. If the war continues and Ukraine is completely defeated, the outcome will be much more painful, it is necessary to remember this.
Of course, the final decision on this issue will be made by the Ukrainian administration and people, but the influence of the West, especially the USA, which encourages Kiev to go further in this regard, is undeniable in the decision that will determine the fate of this country. It is natural that Ukrainians, exhausted by Russia’s occupation, refuse to give up and will not accept under any circumstances the removal of territory from their country. They can’t think otherwise.
At the recent Munich Security Conference, Zelensky was telling delegates not to ask Ukraine when the war will end, but instead to “ask why Putin can still wage the war.” Zelensky, who rejected evacuation offers and stayed in Kiev from the beginning of the war, boosting the morale of the soldiers on the front, said with an iconic quote, “I need ammunition, not a car to escape,” during the first attacks in which he was the target. His needs have not changed to this day, but the exciting effects of his pleas seem to be fading.
Yes, many people voiced this option, including the late Kissinger. It is obvious that Russia will not withdraw from the annexed or occupied territories, keeping the nuclear option on the table if necessary.
“Absolutely not,” many Ukrainian friends I know say to the formalization of land loss. They even get angry that this is mentioned as an option. “Many people died for these regions. We will not give them up,” they say. They state that there will be no end to making concessions to Russia, and that they will then want to bring a pro-Russian government to Kiev, so making concessions is a humiliating defeat and an existential problem for them.
Of course, not everyone agrees. As the war enters its third year, new fault lines are beginning to emerge in Ukrainian society. Those that may be difficult to repair when the war is over: between those who fought and those who did not, those who left and those who stayed, those who lived under Russian occupation and those who did not. A difficult turning point has been reached, with cracks in international support for Ukraine and the cumulative burden of two years of disrupted lives. Along with the hatred towards Russia, there is also the weariness and exhaustion seen in the corridors of power and in the homes of ordinary people.
The Biden Administration’s strategy is to maintain the defense of Ukraine until after the US presidential elections, in the hope of dragging Russian forces into a long war of attrition. This strategy seems logical for Washington, but it carries a crucial implication and a potentially devastating flaw. For Ukraine to remain on the defensive—even if it does so successfully—means that the territory currently occupied by Russia is lost.
As we know from Cyprus, which has been divided between the internationally recognized Greek Republic of Cyprus and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus since 1974, such negotiations can continue for decades without a solution or a new conflict. A situation in which Ukraine retained its independence, its freedom to develop as a Western democracy, and 82 percent of its legal territory (including all its historical territory) would be considered a real victory by previous generations of Ukrainians who lived under the Soviet yoke.
Many Ukrainians may be ready to accept the loss of some territory as the price of peace rather than a years-long bloody war with little chance of success. By turning this into a “win-win” formula, persuasion may be possible.
Based on this determination, UN Secretary-General António Guterres says that it is time for negotiations to end the “unwinnable” and “untenable” war in Ukraine. He argues that there is “enough on the table” to initiate serious talks to establish an immediate ceasefire and stop new massacres in Ukrainian cities. And he asks: “How many more bombs must fall? How many more cities need to be destroyed? How many more Ukrainians and Russians will be killed before everyone realizes that there are no winners in this war, only losers?”
Moreover, no one should underestimate the risk that the war will expand into an all-out war in Europe or even a world war with disastrous consequences. There is a risk of such escalation.
When we put our heads together with Rainer Geiger, who is making very energetic efforts on this issue, some suggestions emerged that should be taken into account for peace. I also talked to Tim Marshall, the author of the book “The Power of Geography”, about what can be done.
Here are some preliminary ideas to consider:
It is of course possible to add other suggestions. But you must start somewhere. Of course, it will take time to detail these and create a suitable foundation based on trust. However, before Russia’s new offensive in the summer, the trigger for a peace process must be pulled, at least within the framework of principles.
If we act quickly, perhaps Putin’s visit to Türkiye could create an opportunity in this sense. China, which influences Moscow, may also need to step in.
Since the solution to controversial issues will not be easy, instead of getting stuck in them and continuing the war, it seems the most rational way to stop this bloody conflict that no one can win and spread the solutions over time.
One of the essentials is that both Putin and Zelensky can portray the outcome of this war, which has caused hundreds of thousands of human casualties and the collapse of infrastructures, as a “success” that can be achieved under current conditions to their own people. We have the necessary elements to do this.
I think the real question that will determine success or failure boils down to what Moscow and Kiev want, as well as what the US deep state and Brussels want to achieve as a result of the war. It is also essential to have a strong understanding in the West that Russian aggression can be restrained from now on.
By Mehmet Öğütçü and Rainer Geiger The Middle East, scarred by years of political instability…
The US Military once again defies Trump on Syria. The Pentagon is pushing back against…
Assad is gone, but I believe toughest challenge for Syria is just beginning. Israel has…
The Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and Kurdish-issue focused DEM Party continue to confound their adversaries…
Intelligence suggests that the operation to overthrow Assad's regime in Syria was meticulously planned for…
As a diplomat, businessman, and traveler, I have visited 135 countries. In many of them,…