Nataliya Gumenyuk
From afar, the situation Ukraine faces after three years of full-scale war with Russia seems clear. Over the past 12 months, Moscow has intensified its assault on civilian populations, sending drones, missiles, and bombs in almost daily attacks on cities across the country. Infrastructure and power stations have been relentlessly targeted. Millions of people have been displaced, and millions more who fled the country after 2022 have been unable to return. Even as Ukraine has struggled to hold the frontlines, its soldiers continue to be injured and killed.
Given these mounting costs, and that Ukraine has, against all odds, managed to defend 80 percent of its territory, one might expect its citizens to support any effort to end the war. That would be sensible in the eyes of many Western analysts. Just as Russia seems unlikely to make major new advances, it will also be very difficult for Ukrainian forces, contending with an enemy that is prepared to burn through huge quantities of ammunition and manpower, to recapture all the territory now controlled by Russia. In this view, securing a cease-fire and bringing relief to the bulk of the country should be a top priority.
Yet that is not how Ukrainians see it. With U.S. President Donald Trump’s vow to quickly end the war—and even before that, the threat from the United States and its allies that they might reduce military aid in the future—Ukraine’s government and population have had to take seriously the discussion of a cease-fire. But such a scenario diverges sharply from the victory plan that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky outlined in the fall of 2024. And many Ukrainians themselves are deeply skeptical of a settlement, saying that no deal is better than a bad deal. Indeed, in Western eyes, Kyiv’s determination to keep fighting—sometimes in grueling months-long battles to defend ruined towns and villages—may seem irrational.
No comments:
Post a Comment