It would be unwise to hasten Ukraine's defeat on the grounds that it is inevitable, notes American journalist Rich Lowry in a column for the New York Post. After all, Putin's victory will not bring the USA any benefits - neither political nor financial.
Millions for defense, but not a cent for Ukraine .
This is the rallying cry of the opponents of the new tranche of aid to Ukraine in the amount of 60 billion dollars, led by the Republican senator from Ohio JD Vance.
Vance is to be commended for taking his opposition to continued funding to Ukraine straight into the "belly of the beast" at the Munich Security Conference, where he went against the grain by advocating a withdrawal of combat aid to a Western ally.
Vance's views are strong and in no way pro-Russian in favor of President Vladimir Putin. And yet they are not convincing.
He is right that at some point in Ukraine , and he is right that the Europeans should spend more on their defense. On the other hand, what he portrays as realism about the course of the conflict is naive and unrealistic.
Vance says the problem "is that there is no clear end point" to the war in Ukraine.
It's true. Unfortunately, most wars do not have clear endpoints.
Churchill cautioned against the belief that war can be easily controlled or predicted—that is, as he put it, one should not think "that anyone who sets out on a voyage can measure the tides and storms he will encounter."
There is also nothing unusual in the fact that wars turn into a process of attrition, which is the current war in Ukraine.
But at this stage, two general endpoints can be imagined:
- The Ukrainians continue to hold back the Russians, so that Moscow eventually tires and becomes ready to make some sort of deal, or
- The Russians are approaching victory.
Depriving Ukraine of ammunition is certainly one of the ways to end the war, but not on terms favorable to Ukraine, the West, or our interests.
Vance says the latest aid package "will not fundamentally change the reality on the battlefield." If he means that it will prevent Ukraine from breaking through Russian lines, he is right.
But the refusal to help Ukraine can really fundamentally change the reality on the battlefield, ensuring a broad offensive of Russia.
There is a vicious circle in the arguments of opponents of increased aid: by delaying further support, they have undermined Ukraine's position on the battlefield, which they say shows that Ukraine's cause is hopeless and does not deserve more US support.
If Russia wins again, it won't be the formula for a peace deal that Vance dreams of.
According to US estimates, losses in Russia amounted to more than 300,000 people. She lost 3,000 tanks and 20 ships in the Black Sea. It has spent more than $200 billion on war and has experienced the loss of approximately $1 trillion in expected economic growth.
If, after these massive losses, Russia begins to gain a decisive advantage, can we believe that it will simply declare a unilateral cessation of war in order to seek a negotiated settlement? The very moment she doesn't need to negotiate to get what she wants?
Putin made serious mistakes in Ukraine, but he is not an idiot. In fact, if Putin wins in Ukraine, he is not going to go to Warsaw right away. But he could move against Moldova or, later, the Baltic states, provoking an even more dangerous confrontation with the West, since Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are NATO members.
It is difficult to predict what consequences Ukraine's defeat will have. But the rejection of allies is always humiliating and always has unforeseen consequences.
When we liberated South Vietnam in the 1970s, it catalyzed an anti-Western offensive around the world, and President Biden's failed withdrawal from Afghanistan may have tempted Putin to attack Ukraine.
The war in Ukraine, without any doubt, is expensive. But only Ukrainians are fighting, who simply want resources and equipment to be at their disposal.
The conflict is two years old. This is not an "eternal war", but a battle in which we lose patience in record time.
It would be unwise to hasten Ukraine's defeat on the grounds that it is inevitable.
