New talks were held this week between U.S. peace envoy Steve Witkoff, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Sadly, hopes that these discussions will bring an end to the Ukraine war are unfounded.
Ukraine wants to end the war with a guarantee it can defend itself in the future alongside direct Western military support. Putin wants to bring Ukraine under Russian control, if not now, then in five or 10 years. Strong Western guarantees would prevent Putin from achieving that goal, while weak guarantees would leave him free to pursue it through another war.
Putin’s motive is a deeply ideological one. The former Soviet KGB intelligence officer has spent two decades describing the collapse of the Soviet Union as a catastrophe. He looks back to the heydays of the Cold War, when Soviet troops stood in the heart of Europe and Moscow shaped global affairs in competition with Washington. In Putin’s telling, the West took advantage of Russian weakness after the Cold War, pushed NATO east, and treated Russia like a largely impotent middle power.
Bringing back that lost status has become the central mission of Putin’s rule. But for Russia to rise, the United States must lose ground in Europe. Absent that reality, the Kremlin cannot contest America’s unmatched ability to project influence worldwide. This is highly relevant to the current Ukraine war diplomacy.
After all, what happens if Ukraine loses the war? Or signs an agreement that leaves it weak and exposed? That outcome, a capitulation wrapped in diplomatic language, would give Russia the chance to rebuild and strike again, stronger. And if it dominated Ukraine, Russia would move closer to the heart of Europe and have a better foothold for challenging the U.S.
For ordinary Americans, the cost of this turn of history would be significant. Presuming the U.S. remained in NATO, which a robust majority of people, inside and outside of Congress, support, it would cost much more to deter an emboldened Russia. These costs would arrive just as Washington attempts to focus on better deterring China in the Pacific. A Russian victory over Ukraine would also prove that borders can be redrawn by force, and that America can’t or won’t do much about it. The centerpiece of American power and influence, its global alliance structure, would fray. Allies from Warsaw to Tokyo would doubt American promises. Trusting in America and accepting U.S. foreign policy requests would suddenly appear less sensible.
Moscow understands as much. Hence, why Putin will not accept any deal that leaves America stronger. A settlement that keeps Ukraine solid, armed, and tied to the West would count as a defeat in Moscow. In turn, only increased American pressure, not platitude, will ever change the Kremlin’s calculation.
W. JAMES ANTLE III | NEW FAKE POLLING SCANDAL RILES DEMOCRATS AHEAD OF MIDTERM ELECTIONS
Some see the war through a different lens. Some realists argue that Russia’s goals center on Ukraine and on keeping NATO away from its border, and that a neutral Ukraine could bring stability. Advocates of restraint say Europe, far richer than Russia, should carry the main burden of defending Ukraine’s sovereignty so that Washington can focus on China. The problem is that the Kremlin’s hostile agenda extends to the West more generally. And resurgent powers that win one war of conquest rarely stop at their new borders. A Russia rewarded in Ukraine would likely follow the same path.
Russia launched this war to shift the balance of power in its favor, and the main power it wants to cut down to size is America.