A Profound And Simple Reason That Negotiations Are Not An Option For Ukraine

-Analysis-

KYIV — Ukraine is fighting for its very existence, and the war will not end soon. What should be done in the face of this reality? How can Kyiv regain its advantage on the front lines?

It’s hard to deny that pessimism has been spreading among supporters of the Ukrainian cause, with some even predicting ultimate defeat for Kyiv. It’s difficult to agree with this, considering how this war began and what was at stake. Yes, Ukraine has not won yet, but Ukrainians have no choice for now but to continue fighting.

These assessments are the result of statements by the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, General Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, and an interview with him in the British weekly The Economist, where the General analyzes the causes of failures on the front, notes the transition of the war to the positional phase, and, critically, evaluates the prospects and possibilities of breaking the deadlock.

Earlier, an article appeared in the American weekly TIME analyzing the challenges facing President Volodymyr Zelensky. His responses indicate that he is disappointed with the attitude of Western partners, and at the same time remains so determined that, somewhat lying to himself, he unequivocally believes in victory.

Combined, these two publications sparked discussions about the future course of the conflict and whether Ukraine can win at all.

Some people outright predict that what has been known from the beginning will happen: Russia will ultimately win, and Ukraine has already failed.

Who remembers what it was like at the start?

It is hard to concede this, especially if one remembers what the initial goals of the Russian invasion were, and how the Russian army struggled in the face of resistance from a much weaker neighbor. The atmosphere was oppressive, and Western experts were convinced that the fall of Kyiv was inevitable within a matter of days. But the Ukrainians were determined to fight, and they managed to defend the capital and their independence.

Today, Kyiv does not resemble the city that was in the beginning of Russia’s aggression, even in spite of the continual threat of air attacks and bombardements.

Although the city is still a target of Russian missiles and kamikaze drones, right now, it is full of life.

These differences are even more felt in, for example, Mikolaiv. A year ago, the city was depressing, it was in range of the Russian rocket artillery, and was a frequent target of enemy fire. After Russian troops were thrown back across the Dnieper and Kherson was liberated, there were further threats to its inhabitants. Although the city is still a target of Russian missiles and kamikaze drones, right now, it is full of life.

In Kherson, however, the presence of Russian artillery continues to make it highly unsafe to live. For now it seems obvious that as long as Russians wage war against Ukraine, its people will remain under constant threat.

Was this a wasted year?

While analyzing Zaluzhnyi’s recent words, it is worth recalling another article he had coauthored in September 2022. In it, he had pointed out that the war had gone far beyond the limits of the local conflict, and some indicators regarding the use of weapons and personnel even surpassed those known from World War II.

The strategic initiative then belonged to Russia, and its goal was to occupy the entire Odessa Oblast and move troops to the south to directly threaten large cities such as Dnieper and Zaporizhia. The Russians could also fancy an attack on the Kherson Oblast to capture Mykolaiv and Odessa, as well as toward Kryvyi Rih. All this would give their command the opportunity to revive the plan to seize Kyiv.

But Ukrainian defense forces prevented all of these dangers from escalating. The threat of losing Mykolaiv and Odessa was neutralized by pushing the Russians beyond the Dnieper in the Kherson Oblast. In the Zaporozhye Oblast, even in spite of the unrealized goals of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, the Russians are on the defensive. They also failed to capture the Donetsk Oblast. After many months of fighting the Russian army captured Bakhmut, and now it is conducting the same intense fighting for Avdiivka, which can hardly be called broad offensive operations.

But the Ukrainian war effort also failed to achieve the goals that Załużny called the ideal theoretical scenario. According to him, Ukrainian forces would carry out several simultaneous counterattacks in 2023, which would include the liberation of Crimea. But, as the general wrote then, for this purpose it would be necessary to create 10 to 20 new brigades, equipped with modern Western weapons, additional artillery systems, an adequate supply of ammunition, and a significant battery of electronic warfare systems.

Ukrainians require more advanced weaponry

As we know, Kyiv was reluctant to ask for new weapons from its partners. And when the West finally decided to hand over the tanks and armored personnel carriers and began making deliveries, precious months had passed in the war effort. The delay in the issue of aircraft also meant that they could only be on the battlefield in 2024. This year, Ukraine was supposed to receive 1 million artillery shells, but according to recent information, only 300,000 have been delivered so far.

Zaluzhnyi pointed out the large disproportion in the capabilities of Ukraine and the Russian Federation, which he claims affects the durability of the war. The key was the inability to attack targets from a long distance, so that Russia stops feeling unpunished and its citizens understand how close the war is.

The West’s limited aid to Ukraine results from a misunderstanding of the scale and reality of the war.

This year, this strategy has changed to some extent. Ukraine received air cruise missiles from France and Great Britain, and at the end of August, the US finally decided to deliver the first ATACMS missiles, although for now they have a range of 165 km, unlike the newer missiles which have a range of up to 300 km. Still, it must be remembered that Russia has the ability to attack targets throughout Ukraine, which keep the stakes of the war high as ever.

According to Zaluzhnyi, the West’s limited aid to Ukraine results from a misunderstanding of the scale and reality of the war, and from fears of the Kremlin using nuclear weapons.

Fatigue with the war effort abroad also reflects the reality that foreign countries cannot help indefinitely. Therefore, as General Zaluzhniyi wrote some time ago, Ukraine should design and produce modern weapons itself. Some progress has been made in this area in 2023, but, according to experts, the country needs to further ramp up production, especially of drones, long-range missiles, and electronic warfare systems.

How can Ukrainians regain their edge on the battlefield? 

Zaluzhnyi admits that the counteroffensive in the south of Ukraine did not bring about the expected results, and that Ukrainian troops made a breach of only 17 km. But he also emphasizes that the current war is an unprecedented global crisis, the largest since World War II, and hence it cannot be won with outdated means.

Importantly, the general indicates that Ukraine has no other choice to rebuild its territorial integrity except through military means. No peaceful international mechanisms can guarantee the desired outcome.

However, the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and indeed the country as a whole, are currently at a dangerous moment when the war may turn into a phase of excessively heavy positional fighting, which is convenient for Russia. The main reason for this state of affairs is that both sides have reached the limit of their capabilities.

What should Ukraine do to wrest the initiative on the battlefield?

According to Zaluzhnyi, it is necessary to gain a technological advantage in order to continue fighting the war. This, however, will not be easy, because Russia has great potential, which it is developing regardless of sanctions. Ukraine must gain air superiority; and it is not only about air defense systems and aircraft, but also about modern electronic warfare systems. It must also find the means to overcome wide (up to 20 km) minefields.

Ukraine has managed to gain parity in the use of artillery, thanks mainly to more modern and more accurate Western systems, but Russia will try to dominate here again. Therefore, it needs to fortify its artillery troops. Moscow has an advantage in electronic warfare, so Kiev must accelerate the process of equipping its forces with modern systems.

Zaluzhnyi also contends that larger reserves are needed in order to conduct active combat operations and improve the command system. This was confirmed by a recent tragedy, when at least 20 Ukrainian soldiers were killed during the celebration of the Day of Missile and Artillery Forces from the impact of a Russian Iskander missile in the frontline zone.

Internal fault lines

As the war rages on, one of the main dangers for Ukraine is ongoing internal strife and differences between the military and politicians.

President Zelensky, responding to Załuzhny’s statements in The Economist, said that the situation on the battlefield is not a stalemate, given that Ukraine takes care of its soldiers and Russia controls the sky. He claims that everything will change with the arrival of the F-16 fighter jets and the further strengthening of anti-aircraft defense.

Zelensky also denied that Ukraine’s partners were pressuring it to start talks with Russia, as NBC News reported on November 4. This type of information has appeared before, but was always corrected by official representatives of allied countries.

We must accept that the war may continue.

Ukrainian military officials and experts have been stressing for a long time that we must accept that the war may continue, which carries with it the risk of reducing military assistance from partners.

It is clear that this issue has become an element of the internal game in U.S. politics (Donald Trump’s victory in next year’s presidential elections could prove critical for further assistance to Ukraine). This risk is amplified by new crises and conflicts in the world, such as the war in the Gaza Strip.

But some partners, such as the Dutch Defense Minister Kajsa Ollongren, remain optimistic. In a recent interview with the Ukrainian weekly New Voice, she stated that the West will not withhold military aid to Ukraine because Russia poses too serious a threat to Europe. Her country was the first to agree to donate F-16s to Kiev and has already spent 1.9 billion euros in military aid to Ukraine.

Other countries echo this. German Major General Christian Freuding, commander of the special staff for Ukraine, said in a recent interview to Stuttgarter Nachrichten that Germany’s budget planning includes funds for military assistance to Ukraine until 2032.

Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto told Quotidiano Nazionale that the time for a ceasefire had not yet come, and Ukraine was fighting to defend its sovereignty. He assured that the support from Western partners had not changed.

Over in Poland, the new dispensation in charge faces questions about what further military assistance for the neighbor may look like. As tensions between the otherwise close allies ratcheted up during the electoral campaign of the past few months, both countries may be looking to realign their relationship.

For now, Ukrainian forces are trying to conduct “active defense”. They orchestrate offensive operations on the left bank of the Dnieper in the Kherson Oblast, which irritate the Russians more and more. They continue to carry out missile attacks on military targets in Crimea, which Zaluzhny called “Putin’s sensitive place”. On Saturday, their missiles hit the new Russian missile ship Askold in the port of occupied Kerch.

Ukraine cannot afford to debate whether to fight or not, because their very existence depends on fighting and winning. The Dutch defense minister understands this well. To stop fighting would mean opening up the possibility of Russia simply destroying Ukraine.