Ukraine Defense Forum 
- Copy to clipboard
- Thread starter
- #46
Doomed to fail: Unaccountability in Ukraine’s plight
This ever-increasing Ukrainian death toll is painting a grimmer picture of the country as its military is being bled to white by Russia.
Doomed to fail: Unaccountability in Ukraine's plight
It is not only Russia that Zelensky is fighting a war against; it is also the Ukrainian press—as confirmed by the US Department of State. Photo: REUTERS
Just as the Soviet Union fell, the United States proudly acknowledged Francis Fukuyama's famous claim that both Nazism and communism had been defeated, and adopted the grand strategy of the liberal international order. Yet, in a paradoxical twist, the US is now funding the Azov Brigade in Ukraine, a neo-Nazi militia founded and armed by the Ukrainian ministry in 2014 which the White House itself had banned in 2018. This complex and contradictory nature of US foreign policy reveals a crack in the edifice of supporting a democratic, benign Ukraine against an autocratic, aggressive Russia.
As Republican Senator Lindsey Graham once said, Ukrainians "will fight to the last person." This deeply troubling declaration summarises two primary sentiments that are prevalent among Western elites. First, as political scientist John Mueller concluded, Americans are highly sensitive to the loss of American lives, but there is a marked indifference to the casualties suffered by foreigners. Second, as some analysts opine, the US objective in this war isn't Ukrainian prosperity, but something else.
Examining the US posture on Ukraine reveals a broader strategy where its primary objective is to weaken Putin's regime militarily, politically, and socially, rather than prioritising the well-being and sovereignty of Ukraine. This tactic is exemplified in Joe Biden's remarks about how Russian President Vladimir Putin "cannot remain in power," Lindsey Graham's tweet that "the only way" to end this war is a Russian insurgency and regime change, Canadian deputy prime minister's parliament speech advocating the "entire vanquishing" of Putin, and the similarly aligned worldviews of the governments of UK and Sweden.
While this geopolitical objective of the "collective West" takes precedence, the true cost of the war is borne by Ukrainian citizens who continue to suffer immense casualties, displacement, and incalculable losses. A report by The New York Times referred to at a US congressional hearing indicates that Ukrainians have suffered more deaths than Russians. This ever-increasing Ukrainian death toll is painting a grimmer picture of the country as its military is being bled to white by Russia.
Apart from relentless Russian bombardment, Ukraine's vulnerabilities are appearing stronger as videos of forced conscription of young Ukrainians are circulating on social media. Its average military age is now 43, and the balance of power decisively favours the Russians. There are certainly no metrics in this war that ensures a Ukrainian victory, since the regime is facing collapsing manpower, airpower, and artillery stockpile. No amount of Western aid can rectify this imbalance, since the US itself does not have the industrial capacity to produce adequate artillery and munitions for Ukraine. Russian defence production outnumbers that of the US and Europe combined by three to sevenfold, as reported by NATO intelligence and Estonian intelligence, respectively.
It is not only Russia that Zelensky is fighting a war against; it is also the Ukrainian press—as confirmed by the US Department of State. However, international coverage of Ukrainian domestic politics remains critical of the current leadership. Zelensky's decisions to cancel elections, fire unit heads of different ministries, and the growing discontent among Ukrainian public, vividly portray a nation in internal turmoil—all of which have "shaken the confidence" of the West in his regime. Both parties "have hit their lowest ebb," according to Ukrainian officials. Biden's decision not to attend Ukraine's peace summit in Switzerland has also made Zelensky "very irritated," fueling speculations that the US views Ukraine as a lost cause.
Moreover, unrest is not confined to Ukraine alone. Fractions within the European Union are experiencing uproar as well. The defeat of leftist and centrist parties in EU polls reflect that the public opinion is aligned with those political parties that oppose Ukrainian complicity. Amid that, talks of forced conscription are circulating among the German political class. Even the former defence minister of the UK compared the inadequate support to Ukraine with a failed European leadership. So, in an effort to increase Europe's support for Ukraine, Emmanuel Macron and Olaf Scholz recommended Ukraine use French and German missiles to attack the Russian homeland just as Biden approved using US missiles to hit Russian territories.
These developments have influenced Russia to implement a series of diplomatic initiatives. Its latest bilateral partnership with North Korea aims to provide mutual assistance in the face of an attack. Russia's Eurasian Security Framework aims to align with other nations to counter NATO, and its Vietnam partnership further solidifies this strategy. Furthermore, Moscow has offered yet another peace deal just a day before Ukraine's peace summit, aiming to establish Russia's eagerness to end the conflict sooner. Unsurprisingly, the US rejected the deal almost immediately. Putin foresaw this as he mentioned that the essence of this proposal is to end the conflict, not freeze it, "as the West wants".
Meanwhile, Washington has offered everything to Ukraine but a NATO membership. So far, Zelensky has received a 10-year security guarantee, $60 billion in aid, a $50 billion loan, and foolhardy guidance. It is no surprise that he lambasted NATO several times for not holding up its promises. Since the US understands that NATO membership for Ukraine means crossing the "Russian red line," something which the Head of NATO himself acknowledged, it is prolonging this losing war simply to put up a fight against Putin's regime. But in reality, such action is allowing Russia to turn Ukraine into a dysfunctional rump-state.
At this crucial stage, one might think it is time for the West to explore potential exit strategies or negotiate a settlement that minimises losses. But as can be seen with the 10-year security guarantee Washington has provided, this is not likely to occur anytime soon.
"There is no faith in Kyiv," laments Sergey Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister. After what happened with the peace talks, upholding trust has become difficult for Russia. When the 2014 Minsk Accords progressed towards mutual agreement, its key architects—German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President François Hollande, and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko—walked out from the negotiation and later explicitly admitted that they were deceiving Vladimir Putin to buy Ukrainians time. What's ironic is Angela Merkel herself opposed NATO enlargement to Ukraine in 2008 and said that this move would be interpreted as a "declaration of war" by Russia.
Fast forward to post-invasion, Zelensky declared in March 2022 that Ukraine will not join NATO and proceeded to cut a deal at the Istanbul Communiqué in April 2022. However, Washington and London influenced Kyiv to withdraw, as confirmed by then Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who was part of the negotiations himself. This concludes that Russia has already been betrayed twice with these negotiations, which demands Putin become more stringent in future peace deals.
In the present landscape, the future looks dismal for Ukraine. Last summer's much awaited counteroffensive, the record-high sanctions, and hundreds of billions in loans and aid—all have failed miserably. With Russia standing stronger than ever, Ukraine will have no relief as the war will be prolonged. It will lose more territory and most importantly, more lives. The West, meanwhile, will certainly escape accountability, just as it was able to after previous NATO quagmires in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, and elsewhere.
Sirazum Monir Osmani is an analyst at a start-up.
It is not only Russia that Zelensky is fighting a war against; it is also the Ukrainian press—as confirmed by the US Department of State. Photo: REUTERS
Just as the Soviet Union fell, the United States proudly acknowledged Francis Fukuyama's famous claim that both Nazism and communism had been defeated, and adopted the grand strategy of the liberal international order. Yet, in a paradoxical twist, the US is now funding the Azov Brigade in Ukraine, a neo-Nazi militia founded and armed by the Ukrainian ministry in 2014 which the White House itself had banned in 2018. This complex and contradictory nature of US foreign policy reveals a crack in the edifice of supporting a democratic, benign Ukraine against an autocratic, aggressive Russia.
As Republican Senator Lindsey Graham once said, Ukrainians "will fight to the last person." This deeply troubling declaration summarises two primary sentiments that are prevalent among Western elites. First, as political scientist John Mueller concluded, Americans are highly sensitive to the loss of American lives, but there is a marked indifference to the casualties suffered by foreigners. Second, as some analysts opine, the US objective in this war isn't Ukrainian prosperity, but something else.
Examining the US posture on Ukraine reveals a broader strategy where its primary objective is to weaken Putin's regime militarily, politically, and socially, rather than prioritising the well-being and sovereignty of Ukraine. This tactic is exemplified in Joe Biden's remarks about how Russian President Vladimir Putin "cannot remain in power," Lindsey Graham's tweet that "the only way" to end this war is a Russian insurgency and regime change, Canadian deputy prime minister's parliament speech advocating the "entire vanquishing" of Putin, and the similarly aligned worldviews of the governments of UK and Sweden.
While this geopolitical objective of the "collective West" takes precedence, the true cost of the war is borne by Ukrainian citizens who continue to suffer immense casualties, displacement, and incalculable losses. A report by The New York Times referred to at a US congressional hearing indicates that Ukrainians have suffered more deaths than Russians. This ever-increasing Ukrainian death toll is painting a grimmer picture of the country as its military is being bled to white by Russia.
Apart from relentless Russian bombardment, Ukraine's vulnerabilities are appearing stronger as videos of forced conscription of young Ukrainians are circulating on social media. Its average military age is now 43, and the balance of power decisively favours the Russians. There are certainly no metrics in this war that ensures a Ukrainian victory, since the regime is facing collapsing manpower, airpower, and artillery stockpile. No amount of Western aid can rectify this imbalance, since the US itself does not have the industrial capacity to produce adequate artillery and munitions for Ukraine. Russian defence production outnumbers that of the US and Europe combined by three to sevenfold, as reported by NATO intelligence and Estonian intelligence, respectively.
It is not only Russia that Zelensky is fighting a war against; it is also the Ukrainian press—as confirmed by the US Department of State. However, international coverage of Ukrainian domestic politics remains critical of the current leadership. Zelensky's decisions to cancel elections, fire unit heads of different ministries, and the growing discontent among Ukrainian public, vividly portray a nation in internal turmoil—all of which have "shaken the confidence" of the West in his regime. Both parties "have hit their lowest ebb," according to Ukrainian officials. Biden's decision not to attend Ukraine's peace summit in Switzerland has also made Zelensky "very irritated," fueling speculations that the US views Ukraine as a lost cause.
Moreover, unrest is not confined to Ukraine alone. Fractions within the European Union are experiencing uproar as well. The defeat of leftist and centrist parties in EU polls reflect that the public opinion is aligned with those political parties that oppose Ukrainian complicity. Amid that, talks of forced conscription are circulating among the German political class. Even the former defence minister of the UK compared the inadequate support to Ukraine with a failed European leadership. So, in an effort to increase Europe's support for Ukraine, Emmanuel Macron and Olaf Scholz recommended Ukraine use French and German missiles to attack the Russian homeland just as Biden approved using US missiles to hit Russian territories.
These developments have influenced Russia to implement a series of diplomatic initiatives. Its latest bilateral partnership with North Korea aims to provide mutual assistance in the face of an attack. Russia's Eurasian Security Framework aims to align with other nations to counter NATO, and its Vietnam partnership further solidifies this strategy. Furthermore, Moscow has offered yet another peace deal just a day before Ukraine's peace summit, aiming to establish Russia's eagerness to end the conflict sooner. Unsurprisingly, the US rejected the deal almost immediately. Putin foresaw this as he mentioned that the essence of this proposal is to end the conflict, not freeze it, "as the West wants".
Meanwhile, Washington has offered everything to Ukraine but a NATO membership. So far, Zelensky has received a 10-year security guarantee, $60 billion in aid, a $50 billion loan, and foolhardy guidance. It is no surprise that he lambasted NATO several times for not holding up its promises. Since the US understands that NATO membership for Ukraine means crossing the "Russian red line," something which the Head of NATO himself acknowledged, it is prolonging this losing war simply to put up a fight against Putin's regime. But in reality, such action is allowing Russia to turn Ukraine into a dysfunctional rump-state.
At this crucial stage, one might think it is time for the West to explore potential exit strategies or negotiate a settlement that minimises losses. But as can be seen with the 10-year security guarantee Washington has provided, this is not likely to occur anytime soon.
"There is no faith in Kyiv," laments Sergey Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister. After what happened with the peace talks, upholding trust has become difficult for Russia. When the 2014 Minsk Accords progressed towards mutual agreement, its key architects—German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President François Hollande, and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko—walked out from the negotiation and later explicitly admitted that they were deceiving Vladimir Putin to buy Ukrainians time. What's ironic is Angela Merkel herself opposed NATO enlargement to Ukraine in 2008 and said that this move would be interpreted as a "declaration of war" by Russia.
Fast forward to post-invasion, Zelensky declared in March 2022 that Ukraine will not join NATO and proceeded to cut a deal at the Istanbul Communiqué in April 2022. However, Washington and London influenced Kyiv to withdraw, as confirmed by then Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who was part of the negotiations himself. This concludes that Russia has already been betrayed twice with these negotiations, which demands Putin become more stringent in future peace deals.
In the present landscape, the future looks dismal for Ukraine. Last summer's much awaited counteroffensive, the record-high sanctions, and hundreds of billions in loans and aid—all have failed miserably. With Russia standing stronger than ever, Ukraine will have no relief as the war will be prolonged. It will lose more territory and most importantly, more lives. The West, meanwhile, will certainly escape accountability, just as it was able to after previous NATO quagmires in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, and elsewhere.
Sirazum Monir Osmani is an analyst at a start-up.
