What It Would Take to Stop Putin Fighting in Ukraine
Vladimir Putin is often regarded as a ruthless autocrat adept at navigating the complexities of international relations. Yet, one thing he cannot conceal is his true emotional state, particularly during diplomatic encounters. Observers, including political figures like the late U.S. Senator John McCain, have noted an unsettling clarity in his expressions, a reminder of his background as a Soviet intelligence officer. As the war in Ukraine rages on, the key question remains: what would it take to stop Putin from continuing his aggression?
Understanding Putin’s Position in the Conflict
Putin currently believes the winds are favorable for Russia. His confidence is bolstered by perceived gains on the battlefield and shifting dynamics in international diplomacy. Analysts suggest that he has no reason to make concessions, considering Ukraine’s refusal to surrender the last portions of Donetsk it controls and his demands for recognition of all occupied territories as Russian. Additionally, Putin desires Ukraine’s military to be rendered ineffective, with NATO membership permanently off the table.
In this complicated scenario, potential shifts could arise from various international powers. For the U.S., under President Trump’s administration, the approach may lean towards pressuring Ukraine into an unfavorable ceasefire agreement, ceding territorial control without adequate security guarantees. The suggestion of letting “people fight it out” could mean reduced U.S. support—a move that might embolden Russia’s aggressive stance.
The Role of Europe: A Coalition of Support
As the situation unfolds, Europe’s response is pivotal. Currently under the coalition of the willing, European nations are preparing for the possibility of a ceasefire while also contemplating the establishment of an international military presence to deter future invasions. Some officials argue that this strategy should focus not only on short-term military gains but also on long-term resilience against a potentially prolonged conflict, requiring a decade or more of commitment.
A significant step would be bolstering Ukraine’s air defenses to secure its skies against Russian drones and missiles. Initiatives like the European Sky Shield could expand operations, but political hesitations remain. Leaders in Europe face the difficult choice of whether to deploy troops to strengthen Ukraine’s defenses without exacerbating conflict with Russia.
Keir Giles from Chatham House insists that concrete Western involvement is crucial: “The only thing that will undeniably stop Russian aggression is the presence of sufficiently strong Western forces.” However, such a strategy would meet substantial political pushback from voters wary of escalating hostilities.
The Economic Leverage of Sanctions
Sanctions remain a critical tool in countering Russia’s war economy. Despite significant inflation and budget deficits in Russia, the Kremlin’s resolve appears largely unaffected, with businesses discovering ways to bypass sanctions. Experts like Tom Keatinge emphasize that the West must adopt a more stringent approach, suggesting a comprehensive oil embargo and stronger penalties for countries perpetuating Russian revenue streams.
In parallel, economic pressures could shape Russian public sentiment. Data from state-run surveys indicates growing fatigue among the Russian populace regarding the conflict. An increasing number of Russians report feeling “very tired” of the war, suggesting an opportunity for additional leverage on Kremlin decisions.
Ukrainian Strategies for Resilience
Ukraine also has tools at its disposal to influence the trajectory of the conflict. Expanding enlistment across broader age groups may be necessary to bolster forces along its extensive frontline. However, questions arise about the strategic decisions behind limiting mobilization to avoid long-term demographic impacts, reflecting a historical awareness of the human cost of prolonged conflict.
Moreover, increasing Ukraine’s artillery capabilities, specifically long-range missiles, could allow for more debilitating strikes on Russian infrastructure. Recent air operations against fuel and military installations have already led to shortages in Russia, indicating that a more aggressive military posture could have substantial ramifications.
The Diplomatic Path Ahead
Despite the prevailing circumstances, a diplomatic solution remains a viable option. Analysts suggest that if presented with a dignified exit, Putin might consent to negotiations that allow both sides to claim some form of victory. Compromises such as a ceasefire along the existing contact line could be negotiated, although this requires a robust commitment from the U.S. to engage meaningfully with Russia.
China’s potential influence should not be underestimated either. President Xi Jinping’s relationship with Putin could be crucial. Should China decide to exert pressure on Russia, it could reshape the strategic landscape of the conflict. However, the current context points to China benefiting from a distracted U.S. and weakened European alliances.
Conclusion: A Complex Lockdown
As the war in Ukraine endures, analysts agree that time appears to be on Putin’s side. While the international community explores various avenues to deter further aggression, a convergence of military, economic, and diplomatic efforts will be essential. The question remains: what will it truly take to compel Putin to halt his advance? The answers lie in a comprehensive strategy that balances immediate military support with long-term diplomatic solutions, aligning global powers in a concerted effort to stabilize Ukraine and reassure its sovereignty in this turbulent landscape.