On December 21, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky began his visit to the United States, went to the White House to meet with US President Joe Biden, and held a joint press conference after the meeting.
Biden accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of using winter as a weapon to expose Ukrainian civilians to cold and hunger.
Biden emphasized that he shares the same vision as Zelensky, a free, independent, prosperous and safe Ukraine. "If Putin wants to maintain a little bit of dignity, the most correct way is to withdraw troops."
But Russia obviously will not retreat easily, "so the United States and its allies will continue to assist Ukraine to win on the battlefield."
On the same day, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced that he would provide $1.85 billion in aid to Ukraine, including the Patriot missile defense system.
Blinken said this would strengthen Ukraine's air defenses in response to Russian missile attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure.
In this regard, Zelensky said that he believes that the Patriot missile can strengthen Ukraine's air defense to defend against Russian attacks on infrastructure, and believes that no matter how the US Congress changes, Ukraine will receive bipartisan support.
In addition, Zelensky also stated that for him, a just peace means not making any compromises on Ukraine's sovereignty, freedom and territorial integrity.
At the same time, Putin also held an enlarged meeting of the Ministry of Defense on December 21, saying that there is no financial limit for this war, and the army will respond to requests.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu also said that 27 countries have provided Ukraine with 97 billion U.S. dollars in military equipment, far exceeding the total value of weapons left by the United States in Afghanistan. In view of NATO’s plan to increase military power on the Russian border, Russia must A group army is formed in the northwest to respond, and the number of soldiers must be increased to 1.5 million.
Between the back and forth, the decision-making preferences of the United States, Russia and Ukraine have become increasingly clear, and the future direction of the war can gradually be guessed.
On December 21, in Washington, USA, Zelensky presented the Ukrainian flag to Pelosi and US Vice President Kamala Harris.
The flag is from the Bakhmut garrison and bears the signatures of front-line soldiers.
(Reuters)
The respective calculations of the United States and Russia
Prior to early November, the American media had released a lot of "exclusive insider information", showing that the Biden administration intends to promote talks between Russia and Ukraine. Sullivan called on Ukraine to show its willingness to negotiate during a visit to Kyiv.
However, judging from the follow-up development, the above-mentioned rumors are more to serve the US mid-term elections on November 8. The purpose is to appease public opinion that is anti-inflation and worried about the energy crisis, and avoid a disastrous defeat for the Democratic Party.
After the voting ended, the direction of the American media changed subtly.
For example, on November 10, the "New York Times" published an exclusive report saying that "promoting negotiations" was not the majority opinion of the Biden administration. Ukraine's military achievements have met the reasonable expectations of the United States. It is suggested that Ukraine should "accept as soon as it is good" and negotiate with Russia to consolidate gains; however, this proposition was opposed by other senior officials. Sullivan, in fact, does not agree with the Russia-Ukraine negotiations. Instead, he believes that if the United States shows a posture of promoting talks, Russia will have the perception that it can threaten the United States.
On December 21, in Washington, USA, Zelensky and Biden held talks in the Oval Office of the White House.
Zelensky said that being able to visit abroad this time proved that he relied on US assistance to keep the situation under control.
(Reuters)
Although the above reports may not be true, they reveal to some extent the complicated situation of the Russia-Ukraine negotiations.
The author once published an article on November 21, "The United States and Russia are secretly negotiating in Turkey. Can the Russian-Ukrainian battlefield cease before the winter offensive?"
Analysis in "Russia-Ukraine negotiations are essentially U.S.-Russian negotiations, and both sides have different considerations.
For the United States, it needs to measure the development of the economic situation, the ups and downs of public opinion, and the evolution of the battlefield. To some extent, the Biden administration lacks a long-term strategy. , prevent the Democratic Party from losing the 2024 general election, and ensure that the United States invests reasonably to strike a balance; for Russia, it has to worry about its internal political security, and more importantly, evaluate the future potential of its own combat power, as long as it believes that it can undertake a protracted war , and even the cost of a war of attrition, it is not easy for Russia to resort to negotiations to resolve the war until Ukraine softens and admits the status quo
Judging from Zelensky's visit to the United States this time, the United States, Russia and Ukraine have each shown their preferences.
The first is the United States. Although it received Zelensky’s visit and agreed to assist Ukraine with the Patriot missile defense system, it refused to provide the weapons Zelens wanted most, including American tanks, fighter jets and the U.S. Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS). ), the reason is naturally that Ukraine is worried about attacking targets in Russia, leading to infinite escalation of the war.
In the final analysis, the Biden administration has discovered that aiding Ukraine is a bottomless pit with extremely high risks. However, due to various reasons such as political correctness, early investment, and internal struggles, it is difficult to abandon Ukraine in an instant, and can only be forced to upgrade the aid.
And Russia also chose to increase investment. From announcing that there is no budget limit for this operation to embarking on military expansion, Russia should have certain confidence in a protracted war, and believes that Ukraine has not shown sincerity in negotiations at all. For example, Zelensky's so-called "just peace" It means not making any compromises on Ukraine’s sovereignty, freedom, and territorial integrity.” Obviously, it cannot be accepted by Moscow, because Russia also faces problems such as political correctness, early-stage investment, and internal struggles. If even Crimea is returned according to Ukraine’s request, Putin The regime is bound to face serious existential threats.
In short, the positions of the US and Russia seem to be hostile, but they are also in a difficult position in the battle situation, and can only be forced to continue to increase their weight as the war progresses.
As for where to increase the stake and who will give up first, it largely depends on the dynamics of the battlefield in Ukraine and the internal situation of various countries.
On December 21, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky received a standing ovation from Vice President He Jinli and Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi when he delivered a speech at the U.S. Congress.
(Reuters)
where is the war going
As for whether Ukraine has the initiative to negotiate?
As mentioned earlier, the Russia-Ukraine negotiations are essentially U.S.-Russia negotiations, because in the current situation, Ukraine has the successful experience of the Kharkiv counteroffensive, and the blood feud with Russia has been accumulated for a long time. Basically, only European and American assistance Incessantly, he will grit his teeth and fight the Russian army to the death.
However, even if there is no possibility of stopping the aid from Europe and the United States, the cost of casualties in Ukraine should not be underestimated. Compared with Russia, which announced a partial mobilization as late as September, Ukraine had announced a national mobilization as early as February 24 after the war broke out, and the cumulative number of casualties It is already quite impressive. If the future vitality is consumed to a certain proportion, Ukraine may also be forced to face up to the option of negotiation.
A closer look at the reason why Ukraine is still insisting on head-to-head confrontation should be based on observations and judgments at the beginning of the war, that is, it believes that Russia is eager to win quickly and should not be able to withstand the protracted war. Therefore, as long as the war is protracted with the assistance of Europe and the United States, Putin will It will be forced to resign and negotiate a truce, and Ukraine will have a chance to recover Udon and Crimea.
Under this thinking, Ukraine mobilized a large number of people to form a "Homeland Defense Brigade" to act as a victim of the consumption of the Russian army on the battlefield, trying its best to preserve the military fortress and elite of Ukraine, which took 8 years to build, and prolong the war process.
However, although the performance of the Russian army is not satisfactory, Putin's will to war is very strong.
Seeing Kyiv’s refusal to back down, Moscow’s bargaining chips have also risen. First, it did not hesitate to announce its first mobilization after World War II. Then it launched a large-scale attack on Ukraine’s infrastructure and energy equipment. Now it is announcing an expansion of its military, making preparations for replenishing the front lines in the future.
Of course, it is difficult for Russia to achieve the initial goals of "de-Nazification" and "de-militarization", but at least it must consolidate the status quo in order to "not lose".
On December 21, in Washington, USA, Zelensky shook hands with members of both houses of Congress.
(Getty Images)
In short, both Russia and Ukraine are putting all their eggs in one basket. Now that winter is approaching, the ever-increasing combat costs will continue to test the will of the two countries to fight. Unable to extricate himself, although he did not send troops this time, he is still caught in a dilemma between high-profile idealism and inertia of realism, and is held hostage by the escalating battlefield situation, and may eventually cut his tail to survive at a certain moment.
From this perspective, the war may eventually lead to three endings with different probabilities.
First, Ukraine successfully survived the collapse of the Russian offensive and withdrew its troops, and finally regained the Russian-occupied areas such as the four places in Udon and Crimea.
However, several preconditions need to be met in order to bring about this outcome: Europe and the United States continue to increase aid, some kind of political crisis or color revolution breaks out in Russia, and the Ukrainian army has not mutinied.
However, in view of the huge disparity in size between Russia and Ukraine, this outcome should be an extremely low probability event.
Second, the Russian army successfully survived until Ukraine’s will to resist collapsed, forcing Ukraine to give up retaking Crimea and other Russian-occupied territories, and even allowing it to agree to various “Finlandization” conditions, including renunciation of joining NATO, law amendments to promise neutral status, and the conversion of the Russian language As the second official language of Ukraine, banning anti-Russian political parties, revising the narrative of history textbooks, restricting the media to publish anti-Russian propaganda, and completely abandoning offensive weapons, etc.
To bring about such an outcome, in addition to Russia's new offensive, Europe and the United States must also refuse to increase aid and cut ties with Ukraine; The will of the military to resist, and the serious gap in armaments was exposed after the NATO intelligence and investigation system actually entered the field. Ukraine has also been substantively NATOized after several months of military assistance, and the pro-Russian forces have been wiped out on a large scale. This outcome should also be an extremely low probability event. .
Third, the stalemate in the war of attrition continues. In the end, the United States, Russia and Ukraine are all exhausted from investment, and can only be forced to cease fire and stop losses, moving towards an ending similar to that of the Korean Peninsula and India, Pakistan and Kashmir. As for the actual situation, it will be more biased towards Russia. A partial retreat, or a partial compromise by Ukraine, will depend on future engagements.
Although this result is not satisfactory, it is the outcome with the highest probability at the moment.
Under this ending, the United States, Russia, and Ukraine failed to achieve their complete goals, but the cost of continuing the war was too high, so they had to choose a ceasefire and truce in order to exchange various conditions, including acquiescing to the status quo.
On December 21, in Washington, USA, Zelensky delivered a speech to the US Congress.
He reiterated that Ukraine would not surrender and thanked the U.S. for aid, saying "your money is not charity, it is an investment in global security and democracy." (Getty Images)
Therefore, the final result of the war may be: Ukraine resisted Russia’s de-Nazification and de-militarization efforts, but failed to recover the Russian-occupied areas, and faced the dilemma of rebuilding the country. Displaced, it is doomed that its productivity will be lower than before the war, and its economic prospects are quite bleak; although Russia has plundered the eastern elite industrial belt with high output value of Ukraine, it has also successfully split Ukraine and consolidated the referendum results of the four places to join Russia. Not only failed to make Ukraine Finnish, but also forged a blood feud in the war, making it extremely difficult for the pro-Russian forces in the country to survive, and it was impossible to reverse the fact that Ukraine had a substantial relationship with NATO; Part of the ideological and public opinion front, the Angela Merkel line that frustrated the cooperation between Europe and Russia, and the extremely anti-Russian Ukrainian vassal did not bring down Putin. Lost advantage in the second general election.
In addition, under this ending, Russia and Ukraine should sign relevant agreements and achieve a ceasefire and peace talks. However, it should be difficult to reach a consensus on the ownership of the Russian-occupied lands. It may follow the suggestions of people such as Elon Musk (Elon Musk) to carry out international negotiations. The supervised national self-determination vote may follow the precedent of the Kosovo model, that is, Ukraine stated that it would never give up its sovereignty over the Crimea and the four Russian-occupied territories, but in essence gave up its military recovery efforts, while the Russian and Ukrainian armies The confrontation will continue in the disputed area, and the possibility of friction or even renewed conflict in the future cannot be avoided.
In all fairness, if the war finally goes to this third ending, there will be no significant difference from the current battle situation, except that the level of firefighting will be greatly reduced, and there will be some changes in the battle front and actual control area.
In other words, compared with the investment in the offensive in the early stage, the casualties and costs under the war of attrition may turn out to be relatively meaningless investment in the end.
But today's Russia-Ukraine battlefield is like Europe in 1916. All countries are tired of the war of attrition and want to find a diplomatic solution, but they don't want to waste their initial investment, and they don't want to be seen as weak, so the war is finally delayed. It took a long time to settle.
At present, the United States, Russia and Ukraine all have the power to promote talks, but they cannot overwhelm the faction of protracted war. Otherwise, there will be no developments such as Zelensky’s visit to the United States, the United States’ decision to lose the Patriots to Ukraine, and Russia’s announcement of military expansion; but looking at the limited capabilities of the three countries , The ceasefire after the attrition war is a high probability event in the future, but all parties have invested too much now, and think that they can persist, and they don’t know how to explain the sudden truce to the inside, and this may be Russia The Ukraine conflict is repeating the sad signs of World War I: in order to end the war and move towards negotiations, we have to create conditions with mountains of corpses and seas of blood.
What would it mean if the Russo-Ukrainian war ended in the style of the Korean Peninsula and India-Pakistan Kashmir?
All parties achieved only part of their goals, but because the war of attrition lasted too long and the cost of continuing the war was too high, they were forced to negotiate a ceasefire.
What does the Kosovo model of Ukraine and Russia mean?
Ukraine does not give up its claim of sovereignty over it, but it has essentially given up its military recovery efforts. However, this cannot prevent the continued confrontation between Russia and Ukraine here, nor can it guarantee that conflicts and military frictions will not resume.
Zelensky's visit to the United States｜Russia-Ukraine war is protracted
Talking about Russia-Ukraine peace talks again: Kissinger's changes and changes US-Russia secret talks in Turkey Can the Russian-Ukrainian battlefield cease fighting before the winter offensive?
Russia-Ukraine War｜Political exchange or brewing offensive What message does the Russian army withdraw from Kherson?