Several American officials do not seem to believe in the complete victory of Kyiv. At the same time, the war can drag on for years. The corresponding analysis was published by Foreign Policy magazine by professor Stephen M. Walt.
The author of the article, professor of international relations at Harvard University Stephen M. Walt believes that the administration of Joseph Biden may find itself «in an awkward position» regarding the Ukrainian issue.
«On the one hand, she is publicly committed to winning the war and hopes that American soldiers will not take part in hostilities, but the entire national security establishment is helping Ukraine in many ways. On the other hand, the administration also seems to be aware of the risks of escalation, does not want to get involved in a war with Russia, and some US officials seem to think that a complete victory for Ukraine is unlikely,» — Walt writes.
Next, the author theorizes about the possible ending of the war with a «disappointing compromise», for some reason calling it the most profitable, despite Ukraine’s current military successes. At the same time, Walt does not detail what exactly such a compromise will entail, he only says about the part of Ukrainian territory that will be controlled by Russia.
The author notes that it will be difficult for the US to get out of a long-term conflict because it would mean admitting its defeat, and escalation would bring the situation to a dead end, add to the suffering of Ukrainians and threaten the use of nuclear weapons.
Similar narratives are constantly spread by officials of the Russian Federation and state-controlled mass media. «War to the last Ukrainian«, «the USA will lose in this war» (although it is not a party to the conflict, only helps Ukraine in the war with the aggressor — author), «every war ends with negotiations«, «Russia can use nuclear weapons» — all similar messages are constantly heard as part of the information war against Ukraine to deprive Kyiv of Western support and preserve the already captured territories
War for years? But the Ukrainian army is ready for a winter campaign against the enemy
Let’s take a closer look at each of Professor Stephen M. Walt’s theses. Indeed, the representatives of the Ukrainian authorities are trying to avoid talking about the specific terms of the end of the war, insisting that the first place for us is the result.
Security forces sometimes allow themselves to make fairly bold predictions, such as Oleksiy Danilov, head of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, who wrote on Armed Forces Day about Ukraine’s exit to the borders in 1991 by the end of next spring. However, it should be assumed that such statements can have a certain political character in the conditions of information warfare. At the same time, no representative of the military-political leadership in any conversation suggested that it could be years.
Moreover, amid talk of a winter operational pause, the military command publicly announced the continuation of offensive operations. Moreover, Ukraine is better prepared for cold weather due to the better equipment of the army thanks to the help of Western countries.
Everyone admits this. In particular, the head of the Pentagon, Lloyd Austin.
«We have done a lot to prepare the Ukrainians to fight in the winter and to allow them to continue to put pressure on our opponents during the winter months.»
So, there can be no question of prolonging the war.
Ukrainian military expert Ruslan Forostyak:
«After the enemy left Kherson, large units were redeployed to where the main combat operations are now taking place: Soledar, Vugledar, Bakhmut, Maryinka — Donetsk direction»
«We are accumulating forces; we are holding back this mad rush (the enemy threw mad forces in this direction). When severe frosts come, the ground will freeze, and we will proceed to victorious offensive actions. This process is already starting in the Kupiansk direction» — this is how the expert commented on the situation.
As for the supply of weapons, Ukraine’s Western partners all declare their continued support. Including the USA. In this article, we discussed why we should not expect a change in the attitude of the United States toward Ukraine after the relative victory of the Republicans in the congressional elections.
Nuclear blackmail of the world by the Russian Federation
Nuclear weapons are perhaps Russia’s most important argument to force Ukraine to stop returning its territories, and the collective West to stop providing aid. The mere mention of the nuclear potential of the Russian Federation on the airwaves of federal channels makes local propagandists ecstatic about journalism.
Even if you put aside many controversial technical points that are unlikely to allow a nuclear strike and the fact that most of the Russian leadership still understands the real consequences, it is clear that NATO member states will never allow this.
Back on September 30, the head of the Alliance, Jens Stoltenberg, sent a clear signal to Moscow: nobody will allow Putin to start a nuclear war. The very attempt will turn out to be a disaster for Russia. And Moscow’s «dangerous nuclear rhetoric» will result in an additional concentration of NATO forces in the eastern part of the North Atlantic Alliance.
Summarizing all of the above, it can be noted that no one is going to drag out the war for years. Ukraine has already demonstrated its offensive potential by liberating Kharkiv Oblast and Kherson. Offensive actions will continue in the winter, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine are better prepared for the cold weather than the Russian army. There is currently no talk of a real nuclear threat. Therefore, promoting theses, which Professor Walt emphasized in his article, is nothing more than playing along with the aggressor country. Consciously or not, but playing along with the state, whose actions have been condemned by the entire civilized world.