Russia's war against Ukraine, which has been going on for three years, is far from over. Both sides – the Kremlin and the Ukrainians – showed determination to continue the struggle.
The American magazine Foreign Policy polled prominent analysts about their predictions for the outcome of this war, and so far they see no end in sight.
Professor Angela Stent, author of the book "Putin's World. Russia and its leader in the eyes of the West", claims that the current situation in Ukraine has no clear way out.
Ukraine needs to mobilize more military resources, but given its smaller population, this may be difficult. The armed forces of both sides have their own problems - Russia buys weapons from different countries, while Ukraine depends on the support of Europe and the United States.
The European Union recently approved financial aid in the amount of 54 billion dollars for Ukraine, which will allow it to continue functioning. However, the main donor remains the United States. If Congress does not approve the $60 billion in aid, American military support could be curtailed.
The chances of peace talks in 2024 are very slim, and neither side will win a decisive victory. The Kremlin is determined only for the capitulation of Ukraine, while the Ukrainian leaders will not agree to such conditions.
Predictions for the end of the conflict include the possibility of a Korean model with a ceasefire and Western security guarantees for Ukraine. However, under the conditions when Putin or his followers who share his views will remain in power, this is unlikely.
The Second Cold War: New Realities and Geopolitical Changes
China expert Jo Inge Beckevold notes that when Russian troops invaded Ukraine in February 2022, it was a clear signal of an accelerating geopolitical divide between the United States and its allies on the one hand and the Sino-Russian axis on the other.
In 2024, this division grows even more, reminiscent of the situation of the Cold War.
First, the war strengthened Beijing's influence over Moscow. Isolated from the West, Moscow depends on China as a market for its exports, a supplier of goods and a partner in the development of new technologies. Beijing's support for Moscow has exacerbated the rift between China and Europe, which has rejected China's peace plan for Ukraine, and Beijing has lost influence in Central and Eastern Europe.
Europe is now trying to avoid its previous dependence on Russian energy resources by strengthening close ties with China. At the same time, Beijing seeks to increase its self-sufficiency.
Russian aggression has also strengthened transatlantic unity, forcing European NATO members to increase their defense spending, drawing Finland and Sweden into the alliance and prompting the United States to increase its military presence in Europe.
All these events indicate a new reality, different from the first Cold War. Today, the Sino-Russian partnership has a stronger geopolitical basis than the former Sino-Soviet partnership. However, transatlantic unity remains fragile, with signs of rupture.
Each individual case may not threaten Western unity, but together they have a significant impact. After all, former US President Donald Trump questioned NATO's fifth article, openly expressing doubts about US commitments to the defense of European allies.
Thus, Russia's attack on Ukraine revealed the weakness of the Western bloc. Europe still probably has not fully understood the realities of war, be it Russian aggression or a new cold war.
During the Cold War, the United States was able to take advantage of the differences between Beijing and Moscow. Today, these two states have a stronger position and can influence the Western bloc.
Sanctions do not have an immediate effect: a two-year analysis
Agatha Demare, a columnist for Foreign Policy magazine and a senior researcher in geoeconomics at the European Council on Foreign Relations, draws attention to the results of two years of Western financial and economic sanctions against Russia.
She singles out three key points.
First, Moscow is waging an information war against sanctions, which has led to a general perception in the world that they are ineffective. However, this raises the question: if the sanctions are not effective, why is the Kremlin so actively promoting their discredit?
The media also often emphasize how Russia circumvents sanctions. Illegal imports exist, but the real situation is more complicated than it seems. Russian high-tech imports are down about 40% from the previous pre-sanctions period, when Russia's need for high-tech is likely to be highest.
This is not enough to stop Moscow's military actions, and more efforts are needed to strengthen export controls. But the 40 percent reduction remains a significant, if understated, success of the sanctions.
Second, the impact of sanctions on Russian business is becoming increasingly visible, especially in sectors that have lost access to Western equipment and technology. For example, the Siberian airline S7 was forced to suspend the operation of Airbus aircraft due to a lack of engine parts, and the company "Lukoil" stopped the installation of cracking due to the breakdown of Western equipment. Such incidents are expected to become more frequent in 2024, demonstrating that sanctions are a marathon, not a sprint.
Thirdly, the solution to Ukraine's financial problems may become possible through the use of Russian assets frozen in the West. However, this issue causes a contradiction between the allied states. The US and Britain advocate the confiscation of these assets and their transfer to Ukraine, considering it a moral necessity, while some EU countries are resistant to this idea for fear of undermining confidence in the Western financial system.
