As twilight falls on 2023, the uncertainty of the global situation has never been more heightened. The world is grappling with two raging wars with heartrending causalities along with compounding crises amid a bleak global economic outlook. Russia’s war in Ukraine has had the world divided and ushered in fundamental transformations in the global order. The question is: Where is the war going two years after its start?
The leaders of the two countries, one fighting for influence and the other for survival, Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelenskyy recently held pressers in quick succession. They unveiled the larger geostrategic logic that’s driving the neighbours to bet their whole agency for this war. While Russia’s rationale is rooted in irredentism, Ukraine’s is rooted in international law.
There is no denying that the West’s resolve to support Ukraine for as “long as it takes” has now been diluted due to the shift in global attention to the Israel-Hamas war, looming elections in the United States, and the unmissable subtext of declining public sympathy for the aggression against Kyiv. It is evident in the blockade of aid packages for Ukraine in the European Union (EU) and the US with oodles of realpolitik negotiations being played out every day behind closed doors. It will take a while, but aid is likely to be released from both the US and EU.
Where do Russia and Ukraine stand today?
Ukrainian armed forces chief General Valerii Zaluzhnyi himself acknowledged the counteroffensive to have reached a “positional form”. To move forward from this point, Ukraine will need air superiority (F16s), anti-mining capabilities, more drones, electronic warfare, and reserves — in time.
The most stunning jolts to Russia in this war, a far superior adversary to Ukraine, has come from Kyiv’s ability to launch repeated attacks on the Black Sea where Moscow was expected to have naval superiority. But Kyiv’s attacks on the Russian navy penetrating layers of air defences were startling. From destroying the missile cruiser Moskva and landing ship Novocherkassk to damaging other submarines, Ukraine has wielded an asymmetric advantage. This was facilitated by its use of missiles and drones. Military procurement can take years, whereas drones can be made overnight and also tested on the battlefield directly — exactly what Ukraine is doing.
Putin’s decision to strike a deal with a Chinese company to construct an underground tunnel from mainland Russia to Crimea shows a tacit admission that he doesn’t expect the Black Sea fleet to protect the Kerch Bridge, which, already damaged several times in the war, is likely to be destroyed by Ukraine sooner than later.
Ukrainian diligence to drive out Russia from the Sea of Azov and successfully resume the export of grains to the so-called ‘Global South’ is a stellar example of resilience. In July 2023, Russia had pulled out of the Black Sea grain deal with the UN and Turkey, putting millions of tonnes of Ukrainian food exports at risk.
The attacks on the Black Sea are aimed at making Crimea untenable for Russia. Kyiv’s sustained offensive in this region shows its admission that it is virtually impossible to eject every single Russian soldier from Ukrainian territory in order to reclaim their internationally recognised borders. The plan to inflict a massive blow to Crimea didn’t materialise in 2023.
Details notwithstanding, it is becoming clearer that while Russia is on the defensive in the Black Sea region, the situation at the battlefront is pretty much stalemated in Moscow’s favour. It just captured the town of Marinka in the east, which, pretty much like Bakhmut, holds little strategic value but heavily cost both Moscow and Kyiv. It also threw Ukraine into the abyss of uncertainty, as supplies from its allies failed to arrive on time.
Russia is basking in its resilience to sanctions by turning into a fully-fledged war economy while Putin is confident of winning the upcoming election and the one after that, and the one after that. Moreover, he has the support of China and its proxies, North Korea and Iran. Unidentifiable subsidiaries are making the oil trade evade price cap regulations. The sanction regime has not resonated with the middle powers’ preference for a multipolar global order even when their wariness with the war and its aftermath has been growing lately.
The most convincing strategy for Russia is to keep fighting a war of attrition until the Western resolve gets weaker, which, as some would argue, is already becoming evident.
These scenarios have probably been thought through. According to a recently declassified US intelligence report, Russia has lost 87 per cent of its total military strength. That a counteroffensive was a missed opportunity for Zelenskyy isn’t a positive indicator for Moscow either. And this shouldn’t be brushed off as mere propaganda. In terms of straightforward comparisons, the granular details of decisive military equipment pose significant challenges for Russia – the situation is anything but a cakewalk for Moscow.
Also read: A war-torn Europe needs military supplies to modernise itself. India can fill the gap
A drone vs drone war?
According to estimates, Russia still has the capacity to fire 4 million 155 mm shells with reserves and mobilised defence production; the stockpiles reinforced by North Korea. On the contrary, all of NATO’s combined efforts cannot produce as much for Ukraine. This disparity, though, is offset by the fact that due to the low quality and less precision of the shells, Russia needs almost six to seven times more fires compared to Ukraine. In 2022, Russia fired almost 10-11 million fires, significantly higher than Ukraine.
Kyiv was also able to economise better on 155 mm shells by deploying combat vehicle Bayraktar TB2 and FPV drones and resorting to rocket artillery systems like HIMARS.
For now, Ukraine is producing more FPV drones, which are way cheaper than NATO’s 155 mm shells. By most estimates, though, Russia will catch up by 2024 even though it may not have as many skilled operators.
Furthermore, several reports suggest that Russia is unable to build the number of tanks that it is losing in battle every day. While Moscow has undisputed air superiority with glide bombs, it is unlikely to remain calm when Ukraine will deploy F16s in 2024. Russia’s unwillingness to resort to its formidable air power has been an unresolved riddle since the start of the war. With significant losses to its helicopter fleet, Russia has also favoured using drones for aerial reconnaissance and air strikes. The war is now a drone vs drone situation where Russia would take some time to catch up.
The only real advantage that the Russian military possesses is the huge potential to mobilise human reserves. If not 700,000 personnel, as analysts doubt, the real number would be closer to 400,000. Generally, though, Russia would not have a human resource problem, as it gives attractive wages to soldiers to mobilise them and keep the momentum going. Ukraine does not have that advantage, and that remains a gaping loose end in this war. While Zelenskyy has announced mobilisation, it remains to be seen how he can match Russia’s capacities.
Also read: West Asia crisis giving way to Israel vs Ukraine competition over US aid. Biden…
Europe must transform & prepare
Ultimately, it is Europe that has to transform itself to support Ukraine. Unlike the US, which seems smug in bleeding and weakening the Russian military, Europe needs to zoom in better into what it wants from all the lives lost and guns fired in its own backyard. The Russia-Ukraine conflict can either culminate into effective negotiation to Europe’s advantage or advance into an endless war, which can cascade into more conflicts.
Popular opinion and alarmism regardless, Europe should be preparing for the likely return of Donald Trump toward January 2025. It might keep the bloc on its toes and not fall back into the slumber of its undoing. For instance, while Germany appears clueless on how to manage the $100 billion promised to modernise its armed forces, it is clinically pursuing how to support ammunition production for Ukraine through revamped defence industrial initiatives. In classic inscrutability, though, it has still not decided to give Ukraine the Taurus cruise missiles Kyiv needs to isolate Crimea.
France is also ramping up its military assistance assiduously. Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway, and the Netherlands have announced not only military aid but also joint defence production to strategically cater to Ukraine’s needs. Several analysts argue that Europe has the capacity to do so, provided the defence industry prioritises the continent. The war is far from being a done deal.
The question is whether Ukraine will hold until then. In all probability, yes.
The writer is an Associate Fellow, Europe and Eurasia Center, at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses. She tweets @swasrao. Views are personal.
(Edited by Humra Laeeq)
Complete nonsense article. Waste of space. I really don’t know whether the writer understands the rality. I think she is writing from cukoo land .