OPINION:
A version of this story appeared in the daily Threat Status newsletter from The Washington Times. Click here to receive Threat Status delivered directly to your inbox each weekday.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s term expired on May 20. This came at a time when Russia’s renewed offensive in eastern Ukraine gained more ground than it had in the past 18 months.
Though Russia has already called his presidency illegitimate, Mr. Zelenskyy can’t hold an election now or in the near future because Russia occupies at least 20% of Ukraine, not counting Crimea.
Russian successes in eastern Ukraine’s Kharkiv region do not amount to much. But in light of those gains, the Ukrainian president has sought not only more U.S. military aid but also U.S. permission to use American-made weapons to again strike into Russia.
Mr. Zelenskyy’s request for more aid is otherwise focused on combat aircraft and air defense systems. Several NATO nations, including the United States, have promised 45 F-16s, but the first six may not be deployed until July at the earliest.
Ukrainian pilots have been training on the F-16 at a Danish base since November, but the training has been slowed by their lack of language skills and the unfamiliarity of the F-16 to pilots accustomed to flying the MiG-29.
When the F-16s arrive, they will carry bombs and short- to medium-range air-to-air missiles, somewhat compensating for Ukraine’s lack of artillery ammunition. The aircraft could prove crucial to Ukraine’s defensive capabilities. But, as was the case with other weapons delivered, the U.S. will restrict them so that they cannot be used in Russia.
Ukraine has asked the U.S. for intelligence that would help its forces strike into Russia again. But because such minor attacks won’t defeat the Russian forces in Ukraine, we should not provide such intelligence.
Whether the F-16s are soon deployed or not, any peace agreement in Russia’s war on Ukraine seems quite far from any leader’s mind. Mr. Zelenskyy continues to say that he will retake not only eastern Ukraine from Russian forces but Crimea as well. Crimea was invaded by Russia 10 years ago and formally annexed as Russian territory. Mr. Zelenskyy must know that his stated goals are unachievable.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has been saying that some cease-fire can be achieved, but his statement is belied by Russia’s renewed aggression.
We should be worried whenever our military leaders say much the same thing as Mr. Putin. That is precisely what has happened in recent weeks.
Both Air Force Gen. Charles Brown, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Army Gen. Christopher Cavoli, NATO supreme commander, have said that Russia’s recent successes in gaining ground in Ukraine seem to be aimed at protecting Russian territory and tying down Ukrainian forces rather than a renewed effort to conquer all of Ukraine.
Mr. Putin said roughly the same thing. He said that Russia wasn’t planning to take Kharkiv or Kyiv and blamed Ukraine for bombing “civilian districts” near the border, including the town of Belgorod. While visiting China, Mr. Putin said: “I’ve said publicly that if this continues, we’ll be forced to create a security zone, a sanitary zone. And that’s what we’re doing.”
It’s impossible to believe anything Mr. Putin says, but there may be a scintilla of truth in that statement.
Ukrainian forces are outnumbered and mostly outgunned in the air and on the ground. But Russian forces, now made up mostly of conscripts, are supported by ammunition from North Korea, Chinese parts for weapon systems (and probably ammunition), and Iranian drones.
Mr. Putin’s recent firing of Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, one of his closest allies and advisers, is probably not a demonstration of Mr. Putin’s frustration at the lack of progress in Ukraine. The recent gains Russia has made came before Mr. Shoigu was replaced.
Mr. Shoigu’s transfer to secretary of Russia’s National Security Council does not diminish his relationship with Mr. Putin. It may be another consolidation of Mr. Putin’s power. The former chairman, Nikolai Patrushev, was considered one of Mr. Putin’s possible successors.
Mr. Shoigu’s replacement, new Defense Minister Andrei Belousov, is an economist-technocrat without military experience. He will follow Mr. Putin’s and Mr. Shoigu’s orders regarding the Ukraine war.
What that all means for Ukraine and Mr. Zelenskyy is significant. Mr. Zelenskyy’s star power has faded, and the Ukrainian public — who still don’t want to be dominated by Russia — is apparently ready for a change in leadership.
That leaves Mr. Zelenskyy with few choices. Further, American aid is not assured, and while some NATO nations are helping, their aid will hardly enable Ukraine to achieve Mr. Zelenskyy’s vision of victory.
His only choice appears to be reaching a cease-fire agreement with Mr. Putin.
If Mr. Zelenskyy makes that choice, it will be highly dangerous. As this column has described, Mr. Putin is a “Duginist,” following the philosophy of Alexander Dugin, who has been correctly named Mr. Putin’s philosopher. Mr. Dugin has written in his “Foundations of Geopolitics” that unless Ukraine is conquered by Russia, Mr. Putin will have no chance of achieving his goal of reviving a Russian empire.
Thus, any peace agreement can be only temporary. It will last only as long as Mr. Putin thinks it is needed to reform his strategy to conquer Ukraine.
In short, the long-term outlook for Ukraine is very bleak.
• Jed Babbin is a national security and foreign affairs columnist for The Washington Times and contributing editor for The American Spectator.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.