0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
1,450 $
12 DAYS LEFT UNTIL THE END OF APRIL

Time Magazine Begrudgingly Admits “Ukraine Can’t Win The War”

Support SouthFront

Time Magazine Begrudgingly Admits “Ukraine Can’t Win The War”

Click to see the full-size image

Written by Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher

The Ukrainian counteroffensive failed, and Russia’s liberation of Avdeyevka signalled a new reality that Volodymyr Zelensky was forced to recognise, the American magazine Time wrote on February 24. Yet, despite the acknowledgement of the impossibility of Ukraine’s victory growing day by day, the Kiev regime insists on begging for more weapons from Western countries.

“The long-awaited counteroffensive last year failed,” Anatol Lieven, director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote in an editorial, adding that Washington’s rhetoric had changed accordingly.

“The Biden Administration’s strategy is now to sustain Ukrainian defence until after the US presidential elections, in the hope of wearing down Russian forces in a long war of attrition,” Lieven continued.

According to the author, the hope now is that Kiev’s forces will achieve the long-awaited breakthrough in 2025 or perhaps the following year, but “Russia will never agree at the negotiating table to surrender land that it has managed to hold on the battlefield.”

“Many Ukrainians in private were prepared to accept the loss of some territories as the price of peace if Ukraine failed to win them back on the battlefield and if the alternative was years of bloody war with little prospect of success. The Biden Administration needs to get America on board too,” he added.

However, Lieven explains that those who believe in Ukraine’s final victory “have engaged in hopes that range from the overly optimistic to the magical,” with an example being the delusional retired US Army General, Ben Hodges, who pushes the false idea “that Russia can be defeated, and even driven from Crimea, by long-range missile bombardment.”

It is obviously ludicrous to believe that a long-range missile bombardment will drive out Russian forces from liberated territories, including Crimea. This does not stop the likes of Hodges from selling this delusion, which also plays into the hands of the Kiev regime, which continues their humiliating begging for more weapons from the West.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba declared on the same day as the publication of the Times article that Kiev is “pressuring” its allies to obtain more weapons.

When asked on local television about Plan B if Ukraine stops receiving military aid from Washington, the Ukrainian Foreign Minister, who is also a top regime propagandist, stressed that he is focusing on implementing Plan A.

“When a Plan B is created in times of war, you need to be sure that Plan B will not occur because, in a war, you have to always be focused on Plan A,” he stated, detailing that this plan consists of “maximum consideration of their interests.”

“We are not in a position to make concessions on military supplies,” Kuleba added.

In this context, the minister stated that if they do not receive projectiles from the US, “we will go around the world and bring projectiles from other parts of the world.”

It is recalled that Zelensky warned on February 23 that his country could only “defeat Russia” with military help from the US and that it would certainly fail without this financial help.

Meanwhile, Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine Oleksiy Danilov urged Western countries to hand over to the country’s Armed Forces all the weapons and military equipment they have because, in his opinion, in the future, “the bet will be on something else, the war will be completely different.”

“[This weaponry] will be scrap that they won’t need because there will be a completely different war,” he said.

The Kiev regime refuses to acknowledge that its professional armed forces no longer exist and that no amount of Western weaponry, if it even does arrive, can reverse the tide of Russia’s victory. Effectively, the regime continues to send thousands of Ukrainians to be slaughtered all because it holds onto the faux belief that the lost oblasts and Crimea can be recovered.

But as Lieven writes, “there is no realistic chance of total Ukrainian victory next year, or the year after that,” even if US military aid continues.

He concludes his article by stating:

“The lost Ukrainian territories are lost, and NATO membership is pointless if the alliance is not prepared to send its own troops to fight for Ukraine against Russia. Above all, however painful a peace agreement would be today, it will be infinitely more so if the war continues and Ukraine is defeated.”

Lieven is not the sole voice, and there is a crescendo growing in the West affirming the reality that Ukraine cannot win the war, no matter how much support it receives short of direct intervention. It is unsurprising that this corresponds with Donald Trump’s growing popularity over Joe Biden, who claims he can quickly resolve the war in Ukraine in the run-in to the US elections in November. As the months pass and we approach the US elections, it can be expected that scepticism about Ukraine’s victory will increase, especially as Russia is expected to liberate more territories once the winter snow and early spring mud dissipate.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Support SouthFront

SouthFront

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
18 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
huh

maybe they don’t need to win the war, maybe they need to weaken russia and kill all ukrainians dumb enough that they are eager to die for jacenuk/poroshenko/zelensky clowns. when ukraine is depopulated, they can continue depopulation in pribaltics, poland, slovakia and so on. then in europe, then in u.s. at this time russian population will be some 50 millions and this is the time when the real war will actually start.

hash
hashed
Fqgqhhs

ask gemini to create a picture of ukrainian and russian soldiers…..

Sorin

you are idiot and sluggish

Piipii

only someone under the full influence of propaganda can write such rubbish. russia has not mobilized the army, uses soviet-era weaponry, new weapons have hardly been needed at the front. nato equipment is destroyed with thermobaric bombs, hypersonic missiles and molten copper (flying bombs). russia prepared to go to war against nato alone since 1945. has done it cheaper and more efficiently. and now shows it on the field.

captain hohol

you’re insane if you think russia would lose that much of their population.

we all know this is some sort of depopulation wef scheme for ukraine, they’re going to try to fill ukraine with more third worlders and that’s not going to go well in ukraine.

same with the uk, that’s a powder keg ready to go off, same with ireland, same with france, all ready to boil over with chaos and violence because people won’t be able to handle what their governments are doing to them.

joe joi

if xoxol fathers, brothers and sons want to survive they must throttle their nazi leaders now!

hash
hashed
Last edited 1 month ago by joe joi
huh

when speaking about military equipment,people don’t understand we don’t have anything like ww1 or ww2 terminology. for example we don’t have any “frontlines”. maybe russians are in village a and ukrainian in village b but the actual frontlines are going 200km deep into russian territory and 500km to the ukraine territory as ukraine is using 250km range missies and russia 500km. so the “frontlines”doesn’t mean anything, better speak about buffer zones.

hash
hashed
huh

so today we have some 750km wide “warzone” and as the conflict develops, it will be more and more wider as both sides will use longer and longer missile range. so the war in ukraine is not correct because it will be soon a war from moscow to berlin and all that area will be a “frontline”. this is ww3 scenario. it will end up in ww3 nuclear exchange, there is not other solution then strategic nuclear exchange.

Nobodyinparticular

but how is using missiles different to bomber planes in ww2 or even ww1? the only difference is now the usa would be within range, but bombs still fell all across europe in ww2 and the less effective air defense and larger payloads meant they did even more damage than we see currently from missile strikes.

Piipii

nuclear war is very far from realism. the pusher of the button knows he is going to die. there are probably several russian nuclear submarines patrolling the coast of washington. also, russia has a new nuclear torpedo that doesn’t even need to reach land to destroy the entire east coast. likewise, us submarines patrol near russia.

Sorin

as i said before,you are idiot and sluggish,you have more thoughts like these , stupid?

Piipii

the war ends like in vietnam. when enough people find out the truth and demand an end to hostilities in the eu. russia defends ethnic linguistic and cultural population, ukrainians have never lived in donetsk and luhansk regions, but they don’t want people in the west to know that. angela merkel admitted that she planned the war, yet the west doesn’t care about it.

Sorin

as i said before,you are idiot and sluggish

Piipii

because of that thinking nato lose; the situation is compared to the usa in iraq and afghanistan. what people don’t understand is that the usa lost and had to withdraw because the guerilla attacks became too expensive. russia has always advanced slowly, behind the line there is no opportunity for guerrilla activity when the enemy is completely destroyed. the usa drove tanks through the country with gas pedal at the bottom and left the guerillas alive.

Piipii

russia russia has the best anti-aircraft missiles in the world. ukraine has run out of missiles and english missiles are easy to repel.

captain hohol

most people understand this.

Fqgqhhs

lieven…… danilov……

hash
hashed
Captain Crunch

oh gee, that’s a surprise. i thought time would at least wait until another half million ukies ended up maimed or dead.

hash
hashed
18
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x