Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, five million people have fled the country. Many others have been killed. In addition, Russia has failed to achieve its stated military objectives and has suffered significant losses in troops and materiel. Ukrainians, even those who are apolitical, have fought back against the Russian invasion. While there are many reasons for the invasion, it seems that Putin is not the only factor driving this action.
Putin’s geopolitical ambitions
Ukraine’s Black Sea ports are critical to the country’s economy, and the loss of these ports will be a major setback for Ukraine. If Russia manages to effectively blockade Ukraine’s Black Sea ports, it will gain tremendous economic leverage. As a result, Putin is taking a major gamble. This war could end in glory or disaster for Russia.
The war in Ukraine is unlikely to lead to any favorable outcome for Russia. The Ukraine government is already rebuffed to any claims of annexation. Even if the Russian government succeeds in creating a stable government, it will have a difficult time governing the country. The population in the east, south, and west of Ukraine will likely be hostile. What happens next will depend on how Putin handles these population groups. If Putin does succeed in his mission to divide Ukraine, it may be a disaster.
Putin’s geopolitical ambitions are global, and he wants to restore Russian sphere of influence 100 years after the establishment of the Soviet Union. This move will exacerbate the pressure on NATO’s eastern members and highlight the need for the United States to provide security for the European Union.
Ukraine’s government is unlikely to accept Russia’s terms, and it will be hard for Putin to do so. Ultimately, he hopes to depose the Kyiv government and replace it with a pro-Russian regime in Ukraine. The latter scenario could mean the Ukraine will become a puppet state, or even a base for Russian troops. This scenario would entail a great deal of sacrifice from both sides.
Although Putin’s endgame is unclear, his actions in Ukraine are not an accident. His aim is to install a pro-Russian government in Kyiv, which is subordinate to Moscow. In the process, he wants to get the Western world to recognize Russia’s post-Soviet sphere of influence. This is one of his many endgames. The Ukraine crisis has made him increasingly suspicious of Western leaders, and his strategy is aimed at rewriting the post-Cold War peace.
In a way, the Ukrainian conflict has also emboldened Russia’s foreign policy. The Russian president’s move is an attempt to close the chapter on his “sphere of influence” in Eastern Europe and to re-shape the European security architecture. The Russian president is also looking for new geopolitical areas where he can exert influence.
Ultimately, the invasion will have geopolitical consequences far beyond Ukraine. As an invasion of Ukraine would result in a massive refugee influx across the western border, NATO and the European Union should prepare for the possible consequences. However, despite these concerns, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is still a risk.
The West must resist Putin’s actions by maintaining unity. Although Putin may have wanted to show that Russia is the world superpower, the annexation of Crimea may not be the best containment strategy. Western democracies must show solidarity and remain united. This is essential in a world where polarization is rising and the United States is struggling to remain undivided.
Russia’s lack of military supplies
The lack of military supplies has become an increasingly significant problem in Russia, with the country’s troops often facing shortages of fireproof uniforms, torches, and two-way radios. The country has not yet introduced compulsory conscription, but it has been pressing for it since the Ukraine invasion. According to Reuters, some Russian troops are relying on donations to keep their equipment running.
The Russian army requires a large number of trucks to provide logistical support. These trucks have to travel between a dozen and fifteen miles. Each trip requires approximately one hour for loading, another hour for transportation to the supported unit, and another hour for unloading. This means that the Russian army is forced to spend 12 hours per day on logistical support, with the rest of the day being consumed by meals, vehicle maintenance, and weapon cleaning.
While Russia has an ample supply of artillery, its ammunition and weapons systems are outdated. Many of these systems are old Soviet-legacy models and are prone to wearing out, which affects their accuracy. In addition, Russia also uses ill-suited missiles. The country’s lack of modern microelectronics industry means that it has to import critical components.
As a result, the Russian military’s combat capability has declined. They have fewer young recruits, their equipment is aging, and their prospects are dwindling fast. In the meantime, the conflict in Ukraine seems to be far from resolution. While both sides have committed to “all-in” warfare, their supply chains are severely stretched, and this makes it difficult for either side to maintain momentum.
As a result, Russian military units have lost the will to fight. This has increased the pressure on the Kharkiv front and resulted in the Russian military’s defeat. If the supply of weapons and ammunition is not sufficient, it could fuel a cascading failure.
The Russian military does not have the maneuver capabilities to establish railheads in advance of the arrival of NATO troops. Therefore, they must rely on trucks to deliver supplies. Trucks are limited to 130 miles per day. This would lead to a significant shortage of trucks and a logistical crisis, with Russian forces risking failing to overwhelm their opponents and enduring a logistical pause of two to three days. This would leave Russian forces vulnerable to loitering munition and local partisans.
The Russian military continues to lack supplies. The issue has caught the attention of policymakers in Washington and Moscow. CIA Director Bill Burns flew to Moscow to try and diffuse the crisis. Despite his best efforts, the situation in Ukraine remains dangerous, with the Russian military’s lack of supplies a major problem for the country’s military.
While sanctions have forced Russia to negotiate, the current lack of military supplies in Ukraine has slowed down the war in the south and east. As long as Russia continues fighting the Ukraine, it will eventually wear down Russia’s resolve to stay. In the meantime, military discipline has reached an all-time low, and a nascent insurgency is already threatening railway lines. As the conflict drags on, partisan attacks will only grow in intensity and scope.
Russian-backed Opposition Platform – For Life in eastern Ukraine may have helped convince Moscow of lingering pro-Russian sentiment
There are many reasons why Putin would like to denazify Ukraine. It would allow it to stop being ruled by nationalists, stop the propagation of anti-Russian “Nazi” propaganda, and grant ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine political rights. Besides that, it would also prevent Ukraine from becoming another Germany, circa 1936-37, when Adolf Hitler began militarizing western German lands near the Rhine River and on the eastern border of France.
Ukraine’s overall economy has suffered in the course of the war. With Russia’s blockade and other measures, the country’s maritime transportation has been disrupted and a large portion of its population has been displaced. This has severely damaged the country’s economy, which has shrunk by at least 45 percent this year. The exact extent of the shrinkage will depend on how long the conflict continues.
In eastern Ukraine, the Russian-backed Opposition Platform – For life campaign may have helped convince Moscow of lingering sentiment toward Russia. In the eastern Ukraine, it is estimated that 93 Russian battalions tactical groups are fighting in eastern Ukraine. These battalions range in size from 700 to 900 men. They have suffered a high number of casualties and a low morale. Many of these battalions are composed of men who joined the Russian army from the local separatist areas.
Zelensky’s move has been taken as a signal by Western powers. Western governments have been pushing for a rapprochement with Russia. However, this might not end up in peace.
Zelensky and his team have a positive effect on the mood of the Ukrainian public. Despite their opposition to President Poroshenko, the opposition is now seen as the official opposition to the government. The renewal of the Rada provides transparency, new energy, and opportunities.
The annexation of Crimea and war in Donbas has fueled a rise in pro-Western sentiment, as has a disillusionment with the Budapest Memorandum. As a result, many Ukrainians feel they bear the brunt of the conflict.
Zelensky’s success in the elections may reflect the revolutionary mood still permeating Ukrainian society. Zelensky represents an eclectic vision of Ukrainian identity, war-weariness, and the enduring demand for reform. Zelensky’s regular speaking points include condemning the Ukrainian government and oligarchs for profiting from the war. This echoes the Opposition Platform – For Life’s strategy of exploiting discontent with the previous five years of reform.
Regardless of the motives behind Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, China should try to resolve the conflict and make every effort to prevent it from continuing. China has good relations with all of the parties involved in the conflict and has a unique position to play a major role in rebuilding Ukraine and reducing the economic impact of Western sanctions. Furthermore, Xi Jinping is unhappy with Putin’s attack on Ukraine, and it is not in its interest to prolong the war.
While the war in Ukraine has unsettled politics in other parts of the world, it has strengthened pro-NATO sentiment and undermined populism. Hungary’s election on Sunday may have pushed the pro-Russian sentiment further into the background, making it harder for the West to respond effectively to Russian aggression.
