|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Donald Trump‘s inauguration as forty-seventh president of the United States new chapter in Ukraine’s war with Russia. The conflict – which began with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 – has undergone multiple phases in which both participating nations seemed to have gained the upper-hand, but has evolved into an attritional conflict in which Russia has seen repeated battlefield successes. Trump’s campaign promises to end the conflict “in one day” portend a significant shift in American policy, but are unlikely to literally materialize.
America’s interests in Ukraine – and our government’s role in poking the Russian bear – have extensively been explored by this news outlet’s founding editor Will Folks in previous coverage. Meanwhile, the Russian psyche – and how such a mentality led to Vladimir Putin‘s decision to invade Ukraine – was incisively elucidated by FITSNews contributor Prioleau Alexander just days before Putin’s invasion.
Alexander’s theory of what provoked the incursion is also applicable to what will motivate the eventual cessation of hostilities, and is worth reflecting on as the nations involved in the conflict prepare to seriously negotiate an end to the war.
Russian citizens had been “eating crap Whoppers for 30 years,” Alexander wrote.
“There’s no end in sight, and there’s nothing to look forward to,” he added, a reference to the dismal economic and geopolitical outlook of post-Soviet Russia.
***
While “crap Whopper” isn’t a term one is likely to hear amongst the foreign policy intelligentsia, it is an accurate description of the lot the Russian people have been dealt by history. Russia’s declining population and middling economy have left its people with little hope of a brighter future absent a serious re-shuffling of the geopolitical deck.
“It is a nation of hollow men, seeking to fill a void in their souls,” Alexander wrote, explaining “Putin, they think, may fill that void.”
“They believe he stands for the greatness of the former Soviet Empire,” Alexander added. “If they can just ‘get the band back together,’ greatness will follow — and they won’t screw it up a second time, right?”
Alexander was proven right in his assessment that a war to “fill a hole in damaged hearts” was on the horizon.
Fast forward nearly three years and the terms of the cessation of Russia’s “special military operation” hinge on Putin securing a deal he can sell to his people as “not screwing it up a second time.”
A recent string of battlefield successes should make these optics relatively easy to achieve in Russia regardless of whether the conflict will ultimately be considered a strategic success by neutral observers once the fog of war clears.
***
RELATED | RUSSIAN NATIONALISM FILLS A HOLE IN DAMAGED HEARTS
***
Ukraine’s desperate gambit of sending its best troops out of already-undermanned front line garrisons to invade Russian territory in Kursk Oblast has proven a horrific strategic blunder. At the time of this writing nearly two-thirds of the Ukrainian captured territory is back in Russian hands, or is likely to fall back into their hands in the immediate future.
FITSNews’ prediction at the time of Ukraine’s bold incursion that it is “highly unlikely Ukraine’s capture of roughly 1,100 square kilometers of strategically unimportant Russian territory will change the fundamental calculus of the conflict,” proved prescient.
Russia’s decision to not immediately divert significant manpower to recapturing Kursk Oblast meant further resources could be plowed into Ukrainian front-lines, where Russia has continued to make slow progress. Russian forces have recently captured additional territory in Donetsk as a part of a larger successful westward advance.
These battlefield successes – combined with Ukraine’s worsening manpower shortage – present a bleak picture for negotiators hoping to secure a peace favorable to the Ukrainian people that reflects the nation’s internationally accepted borders.
How Trump intends to negotiate on the behalf of the United States – and the terms he’s willing to accept to end the conflict – are unclear at the time of this writing. While Trump repeatedly promised a swift end to the conflict on the campaign trail, he didn’t mention the Ukrainian conflict during his inaugural address, instead describing himself as a “peacekeeper.”
***
Our armed forces will be free to focus on their sole mission—DEFEATING AMERICA'S ENEMIES. pic.twitter.com/1cGdS7tQk7
— President Donald J. Trump (@POTUS) January 21, 2025
***
Guardian writer Luke Harding reported on Ukrainian citizens’ mixed reactions to Trump’s speech, and their thoughts on how he might bring the conflict to a close.
“I think a deal is unrealistic. Trump is blah blah blah,” Valeriia, a 23-year-old shop worker, told Harding outside of a recently bombed metro station. “He promised to end the conflict in 24 hours. That won’t happen. My friends are split 50-50 between those who think he can do something, and those who don’t.”
Retired physicist Mykola spoke of having hope in Trump’s ability to secure a peace deal.
“I watched the inauguration on TV,” the scientist said. “Trump impressed me. We need to stop the war.”
Mykola added he didn’t know if Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky would agree to freeze the conflict for the duration of negotiations, or whether he would accede to likely Russian demands that Ukraine never join NATO, but told Harding “we have to reach an agreement – it doesn’t matter how.”
Mykola isn’t alone among Ukrainians in his desire to see an end to the war, even if on unfavorable terms. Gallup polling indicates fewer Ukrainians support fighting until victory is achieved, while the number of respondents who favor a quick end to the war has steadily increased.
***
***
The opinions of Ukrainians are irrelevant in their domestic political system, however, as the country has suspended elections for the duration of the conflict.
While many in the definitionally delusional United States foreign policy elite saw provoking an all-out NATO vs. Russia conflict as an opportunity to eliminate a longstanding geopolitical rival – and went so far as attempting to catalyze this conflict with an escalating series of violations of Russian red-lines – Trump’s electoral and popular vote victories, as well as a series of victories for similar-minded European candidates, seem to indicate a decreased risk of a direct clash between nuclear-armed superpowers.
FITSNews will update our audience as Trump and his diplomatic designees attempt to bring an end to this war, likely on terms favorable to Russia, which will come to the negotiating table (if it chooses to do so) with an enormous amount of leverage.
FITSNews has previously been accused of peddling “‘pro-Putin propaganda.” The above analysis is based solely on the realities borne out on the battlefields of Ukraine as well as the geopolitical power dynamics at play as this war approaches its zenith.
While this news outlet has published numerous opinion pieces on the folly of the United States’ meddling in Ukrainian domestic politics, an opinion the poor outcomes of this war on the lives of Ukrainians validates, our commitment to giving our readers an honest assessment of the conflicts in which our nation is involved supersedes any opinions held by the editorial staff of the news outlet.
It is not our opinion that Russia is winning this war on the ground – it is reality.
It is not our opinion that the Ukrainians increasingly do not not want to die in a war they have no clear way to win – it is reality.
We readily acknowledge Putin’s blatant thuggery and willingness to violate international law, but refuse to ignore other equally important realities in service of the U.S. foreign policy establishment approved (but factually inaccurate) narratives.
The American media’s historical willingness to cede narrative control to state actors with flawed decision-making processes has repeatedly led our nation into wars which are later universally understood to have been strategic blunders. With that being said, if you have a different interpretation of the facts (or just want to fire off a letter to the editor calling us Putin apologists) we welcome you to send in a column. We will publish your ideas every bit as prominently as we publish our own.
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …
(Via: Travis Bell)
Dylan Nolan is the director of special projects at FITSNews. He graduated from the Darla Moore school of business in 2021 with an accounting degree. Got a tip or story idea for Dylan? Email him here. You can also engage him socially @DNolan2000.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
2 comments
The ignorance of foreign, and domestic affairs for that matter, at this blahg are laughably naive. Especially the “crap Whoppers” theory.
“Alexander was proven right in his assessment that a war to “fill a hole in damaged hearts” was on the horizon.”
So the way to fill “damaged hearts” is to engage in a multi year war costing hundreds of thousands of lives to the point of having to import North Koreans, and subject the citizenry to the effects of sanctions from many countries. Ok.
It sounds like Mr. Alexander was doing a little introspection to me. Substitute Trump for Putin and you have an apt description of the mentality of the MAGA Cult.
All the blame America stuff is total bullshit. Putin is a violent aggressive war criminal who invaded Ukraine because he wanted their ports and their natural resources for Russia; and he wanted their people to conscript into his armies as he tried to re-establish the Russian Empire. At the time and possibly still, Ukraine was the first step in a plan to invade Eastern Europe. When Trump lost the election in 2020 he had to put all that on hold, as Biden united NATO and defended Ukraine. Still, he continued to murder as many innocent Ukrainian civilians as possible. Now with Trump back everything is back on the table.
So what is best for Russia and what does Russia want? Russia wants to freeze the conflict where it is and have the US lift sanctions. This will allow Russia to rebuild its military and economy so that in a couple of years they can finish the job of taking all of Ukraine. They just want a breather. Putin still has a desire to reestablish the Russian Empire and still harbors plans for Russia to invade Eastern Europe.
So what is best for the United States and Ukraine? The collapse of the Putin regime. Which will happen if we continue to defend Ukraine. We can then negotiate with a defeated and fractured Russia on terms best for the US and Ukraine. This will also put us in a much better bargaining position with China and make a Chinese invasion of Taiwan and a Sino-American war much less likely. China needs Russian resources to fight a conventional war with the US.
What will we do? Whatever is best for Trump. He doesn’t give a crap about the Ukrainian people or peace. If I had to guess, he will go with the Russian plan as he also does not give a crap about the Europeans either and most likely there is money in that for him and his family. If he can benefit from a collapse of the Putin regime, he will go that way. But I am not optimistic. I think we will go the way that is best for Russia. Elon will probably also have a say in the direction we go as he also has business interests in this matter.