"But summits and sweatshirts won't make Russia a superpower. Only a credible show of strength can do that. The war in Ukraine was meant to supply this, but it has instead become a slow-motion demonstration of Russia's decline-less a catalyst of national revival than a case study in national self-harm. Moscow has devoted considerable resources, manpower, and political will to its invasion of the country next door."
"In purely military terms, it has managed not to lose and may even be eking its way toward some sort of attritional victory in the Donbas. But even if it consolidates its territorial gains and keeps Ukraine out of NATO, Russia will have won only a pyrrhic victory, mortgaging its future for the sake of a few bombed-out square kilometers. In other words, Russia is effectively losing the war in Ukraine-not to Ukraine, but to everyone else."
Russia sought to restore great-power status and reshape the post–Cold War order through force and symbolism. The invasion of Ukraine was intended to demonstrate strength but has instead exposed and accelerated Russian decline. Militarily, Moscow has avoided outright defeat and may secure attritional gains in the Donbas, but any victory will be pyrrhic, sacrificing economic resources, manpower, and military capacity. Ukraine will remain a hostile, Western-armed neighbor while Europe pivots away from Russian energy and maintains sanctions. Rebuilding Russia's armed forces and economy will require years and vast expenditures, leaving Moscow weaker internationally.
Read at The Atlantic
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]