Ukraine war looking bleak from West’s standpoint

THE Ukraine war has entered a crucial phase with the Russian army on the verge of a breakthrough in the eastern province of Donetsk. At present, only half of the province is under Russian control.

Media reports suggest that soldiers from the Russian mercenary, Wagner Group, and the Russian army have surrounded the strategically important city of Bakhmut in Donetsk. Some reports claim that eastern Bakhmut has already fallen to the Russians, and it is a matter of time before the western part of the city also slips out of the hands of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s forces.

Even American newspapers such as The New York Times and The Washington Post have lately changed their tone, admitting the possibility of significant advances by the Russian army, including the takeover of Bakhmut in the foreseeable future.

If that happens — and there is a fair chance it might — important Ukrainian towns and supply lines would be exposed to the Russian army, in addition to the Russian takeover of Donbas. After that, the Russians, who already control around 20 per cent of the eastern and southern Ukraine, will likely try to take whatever they consider important for their security, possibly including Odesa, and establish a large demilitarised zone in central Ukraine.

The US, NATO and Zelenskyy would then likely come to the negotiating table, but without many chips in their hands. On the other hand, the Russians would have achieved most of their war aims, including a land corridor to Crimea and a sufficiently large buffer zone between them and the rump state of Ukraine. The declared aim of their ‘special military operation’ — the demilitarisation and denazification of Ukraine — would also be achieved.

Nobody can guarantee that the above scenario would necessarily materialise, but it has to be assessed in the context of reports, including the one in The Wall Street Journal dated February 25, that European leaders, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron and Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz, have advised Zelenskyy to explore negotiations with Moscow because Europe cannot indefinitely support Ukraine in a war which is looking increasingly bleak from the West’s standpoint.

Moreover, the war is ruining their economies and causing hardships to their people, whose anger against their governments is becoming increasingly visible. Instead of a regime change in Moscow, the same could happen in Europe, where the sanctions have backfired, causing widespread inflation, recession, energy shortages and unemployment.

A facade of western solidarity in the war barely hides its weak foundations, which may not survive further blows by the Russians, whose resolve to win the war has hardened in the face of western intransigence. No wonder they put their foot down at the G20 foreign ministers’ conference recently in New Delhi, blocking the issue of a joint statement, something they had not done at the G20 summit in Bali last year.

Russia is not only slowly but surely grinding down the Ukrainian military, but has also withstood the impact of western sanctions much better than expected. Contrary to expectations, the rouble has strengthened rather than collapsed, and the Russian economy has contracted much less than predicted. According to an International Monetary Fund report, while the Russian economy contracted by 2.2 per cent in 2022, Ukraine’s shrunk by over 35 per cent despite getting $46 billion (economic) and $67 billion (military) aid from the US.

Politically, Russia retains the support of many important countries, including China and India, which together represent almost one-third of the world’s population. For this reason, the US, much to its chagrin, is unable to prevent them and the others from continuing to do business with Russia.

Again, while the West has been spreading disinformation about Russia running out of weapons, it is Ukraine that seems to be in that situation. So far, the US and Europe have pumped weapons worth billions of dollars into Ukraine, but that has merely prolonged the war, and not significantly changed its course. A good deal of them are reportedly finding their way on the black market for weapons, which could pose a headache for Europe.

American desperation to harm Europe’s relations with Russia is also reflected, among other things, in its shameful act of sabotaging the Nord Stream gas pipeline from Russia to Germany last September, which was exposed by US journalist Seymour Hersh last month. This revelation has further alienated the people of Europe, and possibly Macron and Scholz too, who are finding it difficult to explain it to their people. The official denial of complicity in the act by the US has fooled no one.

Therefore, as things stand, it is Russia which looks better placed to achieve its objectives in Ukraine, rather than the US. How the West can help Ukraine recover the territory lost to the Russians is unclear. On the other hand, Russia appears to be gaining the upper hand in the war. That is not surprising, because it is an existential war for the Russians in contrast to the West, for which it is simply a game of global domination, in which it indulges from time to time. The West also seems to have forgotten the lessons from 1945 and 1815, when Russia withstood assaults from Hitler and Napoleon, ultimately causing the defeat of Germany and France.

Once again, as in Afghanistan and Iraq, the western gamble seems to have failed. But this time, the consequences of the war may not stay confined to Ukraine; they will affect the prosperous countries of the West, such as Germany and France. In addition to the problems of millions of Ukrainian refugees and the cost of rebuilding the country, western Europe will also face long-term threats to its security — such as terrorism and illicit trade in lethal weapons — caused by a failed state in Eurasia. A devastated and partitioned Ukraine will become Europe’s own Afghanistan, a perennial source of instability in the region.

India has played its cards well, deftly walking a tightrope to protect its interests without inviting a backlash from Russia or the US, which, though unhappy, finds it cannot do much to change the current state of affairs. India is also trying to leverage its G20 presidency to prevent further escalation of the war, but in vain so far.