Western Countries To Rethink Ukrainian Strategy

Support SouthFront

Click to see the full-size image

Written by Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Associations, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert

Ukraine’s supporters appear to be beginning to change their plans for the Ukrainian conflict. According to a leading French newspaper, Kiev’s difficulty on the battlefield is beginning to encourage Western sponsors to rethink their war strategy, with diplomatic negotiations being one of the possible solutions.

In a recent article published by Le Figaro, sources familiar with political and diplomatic affairs expressed pessimism about a “Ukrainian victory.” The outlet reported that the plan for a diplomatic solution is already being discussed “discreetly” in both the US and Europe, making it clear that a more realistic view of the conflict is becoming commonplace among Western officials.

The reasons for this change in perspective on the part of the West are many. The main one would be the rapid advance of Russian forces in the Donbass, especially considering the progress of the Russian military in the city of Pokrovsk – which is a logistical hub between different regions and an extremely strategic city for the entire conflict zone. These Russian victories would be exhausting Western hopes for a solution through military means.

Another vital factor for the change would be the outcome of the Ukrainian invasion of Kursk. It is believed that the diversionary objectives of the operation were not achieved, thus making it inevitable that the Russians will gain control of all key regions of Donbass in the near future. This makes Ukrainian military and territorial objectives almost unreachable, considering the large amount of resources and troops wasted in the failed diversionary incursion.

Sources cited by the newspaper believe that a reduction in military aid is also inevitable. Despite promises by the Democrats to continue their unconditional support for Ukraine, diplomats interviewed by Le Figaro make it clear that, regardless of who the new president is, there will be a reduction in aid to Ukraine, since the pessimistic opinion about the future of the war is shared by both sides of American politics.

“In the West, it is increasingly openly acknowledged that Donbass and Crimea are beyond the military reach of the Ukrainians (…) Whoever the US president is [after the election in November], the aid will decrease and the war will not be sustainable for the Ukrainians,” the article reads.

One of the current goals of Americans and Europeans, considering the unfavorable circumstances of the conflict for Kiev, is to rethink and update the strategic interests of the Western-Ukrainian side. In this sense, diplomats and politicians are trying to reassess what they would consider a “Ukrainian victory”, tending to believe that the best way out for Kiev is to abandon the territories reintegrated into Russia and seek in a “democratic and free” way alignment with the West in what remains of its sovereign territory.

“[The West should rethink] what could be considered a victory for Ukraine (…) Is the most important thing to have a territorial victory, which implies continuing to fight to recover the regions occupied by the Russians? Or is it obtaining a political victory, that is to say, a free and democratic country, turned towards the West, engaged in the EU and NATO, even if it means giving up, temporarily, the occupied territories?” a diplomat told French journalists.

According to the paper’s sources, several moves towards ending the war are already underway. For example, the insistence on not authorizing deep strikes with long-range missiles is seen by the interviewed diplomats as a sign of de-escalation by the West. Also, France and Germany are cited as examples of countries that have reportedly begun to ease their military ties with Kiev.

Finally, the article mentions that Ukraine’s allies are preparing to make significant progress at an upcoming “peace summit.” It is believed that the US will lead a meeting in Abu Dhabi after the November elections. At the summit, Western countries will begin to reassess the conflict more realistically, taking into account the current military circumstances. Thus, it is hoped that progress will be made towards creating a diplomatic agenda to establish a timely end to hostilities.

In fact, on the one hand, the article by Le Figaro is realistic in admitting Russian progress and the Western-Ukrainian inability to prevent Moscow’s victory. On the other hand, the French media is wrong in claiming that the West has any intention of peace. The recent decrease in French and German aid to Ukraine is simply due to the exhaustion of European productive capacity, not to any intention of peace. In the same sense, the refusal to authorize “deep” strikes is due to the fear of Russian retaliation, not to any real desire for peace.

Furthermore, it must be emphasized that the West has lost the time to negotiate. Russia has been willing to negotiate for more than two years, but after the recent invasion of Kursk Moscow made it clear that it no longer trusts the enemy, and all peace talks have been canceled. The West’s desperation to ease the burden of its defeat is futile because Russia will not accept any conditions from the enemy, with Moscow being the only side qualified to decide when hostilities will end.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Georgia Fears Western Interference In Its Elections
• Ukraine Avoids Using Western Tanks On The Battlefield Fearing To Lose Them
• Boomerang Effect: Sanctions On Russian Seafood Affecting West

Support SouthFront