What Is Russian Victory in Ukraine?
I asked five experts but I'll tell you my version too
It’s not a good day at all.
After many months of suspicions and discussions, it became clear the outgoing U.S. administration led by Joe Biden has given up on Ukraine after President Volodymyr Zelenskyy revealed that Ukraine received only 10% from the allotted $60 billion package that we fought for with blood and sweat and that the White House has leaked the secret annexes of the so-called Victory Plan to the press and, most likely, the Kremlin too.
This is all happening at a time when the front in Eastern Ukraine is in tatters and the country is bleeding, with many men being sent to the meat grinder without sufficient weapons or training and the elections in the US coming up.
Regardless of who wins them, — Donald Trump whose "fast plan to end the war” is more or less known or Kamala Harris who’s part of the administration deliberately slow-walking weapons to Ukraine for it to ask for negotiations — it is clear that the West doesn’t want Ukraine’s victory.
So, if Ukraine’s victory is off the table, then what does a Russian victory look like? I decided to ask five experts to answer this question after I listened to Tablet’s podcast WHAT REALLY MATTERS Ukraine’s Future Under Kamala and Trump where Walter Russell Mead defined Russia’s victory the following way:
“Russia ends up with more territory than they had in February 2022, the West is not able to bring Ukraine into Nato or the EU. That would be a very clear-cut political and military victory for Russia.”
Before I turn to their definitions, I’ll tell you mine:
Russian victory in Ukraine is actually simple: the fall of Kyiv, the city they’re profoundly obsessed for historical reasons that gives them the feeling of roots.
Russia’s whole purpose of this war was to capture Kyiv and thus the country. There’s no other goal and no other objective. Which is why anything that isn’t that is actually not a victory but a temporarily acceptable result.
Now, let’s see what others have to say on the subject.
Michael DiCianna, Research Fellow at the Center for Intermarium Studies at the Institute of World Politics
There’s no reason to doubt that Russia’s ultimate strategic goal is the destruction of the Ukrainian state. They may aim to achieve that by eventually pushing to Kyiv, reducing western Ukraine to a rump state that is isolated from NATO and the EU, with little to no Black Sea coastline. It might be annexation of parts or the whole country into the Russian Federation, or it might be installing a puppet government, making Ukraine another Belarus.
More immediate Russian goals are likely not to freeze the conflict, though I believe they’d accept a freeze. Moscow likely sees it slow, but relatively steady advances in eastern Ukraine at the moment as a justification to continue the war gain more strategic territory, and then when Russia feels the economic and demographic pressure of military losses, military expenditure, then Russia would consider allowing for a negotiated freeze like the previous Minsk agreements.
Subscribe to him here
Jason Jay Smart, American commentator and Kyiv Post writer
By the definition of the Kremlin it is:
Ukraine’s neutrality
Ukraine’s demilitarisation
Overthrow of the democratically elected government
Jay in Kyiv, X commentator
Russia’s victory is always the same: whatever they can get away with. So it’s up to Russia’s victims as to how much they take…always.
Jonathan Fink, Silicon Curtain’s Podcaster
First answer: Victory is whatever he can 'sell' to his compliant population. But in his mind, i think victory now is to end up with a Ukrainian state that is not viable economically or politically. But of course this is part of a global war against democracy, not just Ukraine.
Second answer: Victory for Putin is when the West is humiliated, and it is rendered so weak and divided as to not react to his aggression. He will not stop until the hegemony of the post WWII rules-based order smashed, and autocracy (corrupt, informal power relations) becomes the dominant culture in world affairs.
Watch my interview with Jonathan here. Subscribe to him here:
Steven Moore, founder of the Ukrainian Freedom Project
When Russians show up at my house.
P.S. It seems like Steven and I think alike the most. Watch my interview with him here.
Subscribe to him here
***
What’s your definition of Russia’s victory in Ukraine? Drop a comment below to let me know.
Well said Lesia:
As a supporter of Ukraine and also someone who is worried about my country’s decline (the United Kingdom) the collective west have let your country down over the past few years - actually since 1994 if the truth be told.
The Budapest Memorandum was a hatchet job on a new democratic nation by the USA and Russia with the tacit support of the UK. Ukraine knew that the security guarantees (the words used in the Russian and Ukrainian texts) were not strong enough - in the English documents the words “security assurances” were used which have legally are weaker than guarantees.
Even so, I still hold my country and the United States responsible - if we don’t have a legal obligation to come to Ukraine’s aid we have a moral one.
However since the February 2022 full scale invasion, the western alliance countries have used words which would indicate that we are an ally of Ukraine and that you could count on our help.
But over the past 1000 days, while we have helped Ukraine, we have done so imperfectly - with a variety of reasons and on a sliding scale of level of support - mostly in line with the proximity of the donor country to Ukraine.
I used to be somewhat proud of how the UK have supported your country but we could and should have done much more.
For 1000 days Ukraine has defended Europe.
#SlavaUkraini #славаУкраїні 🇺🇦