What to Expect from Moscow
While declaring its readiness to continue peace talks with Ukraine, Russia keeps intensifying its military operations on the front lines, simultaneously resorting to aerial terror against the peaceful Ukrainian population. The reason for this behavior is explained by the complication for it of the external and internal situation, which in one way or another affects the further conduct of the war. The introduction of further US sanctions restricting its oil exports will have a significant impact on the RF. Such a decision could be made as early as the beginning of July. That is why Russia will be forced to agree to a third round of negotiations in the near future, which will demonstrate its further choice of behavior.
A few days ago, President of Russia Vladimir Putin made a series of statements regarding the Russian-Ukrainian war, which he stubbornly calls a “special military operation”. According to him, Moscow is not interested in prolonging the “Special Military Operation”. It would like to end it as soon as possible. And that Russia is ready to compromise with Ukraine, as evidenced by the negotiations. It was also mentioned that the Russian leadership plans to cut military spending… These statements indicate negative changes for Russia, to which it is forced to react in some way. At least, according to plans to temporarily suspend the war in order to replenish its forces. It should be noted that it is Putin himself who is proposing to start the third stage of negotiations with Ukraine. This is nothing more than an attempt to demonstrate the “constructiveness” of his intentions to the United States, but in reality his goal is to avoid new sanctions.
So, what can really influence Putin’s behavior? Without a doubt, a critical worsening of economic problems in his country, which will make it impossible to continue military operations. Today, the Russian economy is in critical condition, – as publicly acknowledged even by members of the Russian government and parliament. Not to mention the warnings of real experts… Moreover, they even speak about this in the presence of Putin himself, during open international events attended by representatives of the Russian Federation’s partner countries. Incidentally, such statements are reported in the global media, but this does not stop individual Russian officials, even though they are well aware that their conclusions about the situation contradict Moscow’s official line.
One example is the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in June. In their speeches, Russian Minister of Economic Development Maxim Reshetnikov, Minister of Finance Anton Siluanov, Governor of the Central Bank of the RF Elvira Nabiullina, Sberbank CEO Gennady Gref, Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Budget and Taxes Anatoly Markov, and other government officials, politicians, and businesspeople described the economic situation as the eve of a deep crisis in the country. This has already been widely reported, so it is only necessary to point out the main, most indicative manifestations of the crisis processes in Russia’s economy. For example, while the first quarter of this year saw a decline in Russia’s GDP growth rate, the second quarter may see zero growth or even a decline in real terms.
Also, as of the end of the first half of this year, the coal, metallurgical, automotive, and construction industries found themselves in a deep crisis, and related enterprises are warning of their impending bankruptcy or, in some cases, are ceasing operations altogether. The crisis may also affect agriculture, which could lead to food shortages in the country. Incidentally, since the beginning of the year, Russia’s budget deficit has tripled, forcing the government to cut spending. By the end of the year, the crisis may also affect the banking sector.
According to various estimates, under such circumstances, the Russian economy can more or less stay afloat from two to three months to a year and a half. That is, until the end of this year or the beginning of next year. After that, Moscow will not be able to finance the war economically. The war may continue for some time only as a result of the country’s transition to a strict mobilization regime similar to “war communism”. But no country can withstand it without external economic support, which Russia does not have and is unlikely to have until it stops its aggressive policy.
Another problematic factor is the inevitable transition of the Russian-Ukrainian war into a positional one, which Russia will not be able to withstand for long. Despite the intensification of the Russian Armed Forces’ offensive actions on all main directions, which in Ukraine and the West is called Russia’s “summer offensive”, it has not achieved any significant success. All of its “achievements” are limited to the capture of individual villages or hamlets that were already in the “gray zone”, as well as minor advances in wooded areas and forest plantations. In general, this capture amounts to no more than one percent of Ukrainian territory since the beginning of this year. Of course, even such consequences of the enemy’s actions cannot be considered acceptable for Ukraine. But the enemy is paying a high price for them. And while Russia can somehow compensate for its personnel losses, the same cannot be said for its armored vehicles, artillery, and motor transport. Without them, a large-scale offensive to break through the front line, even with the massive use of UAVs, is simply impossible.
Right now, the situation on the front resembles World War I, in particular, the line of contact between Germany and France. At that time, the massive use of artillery and machine guns, as well as the creation of powerful defensive fortifications by the warring parties, made it virtually impossible to carry out effective large-scale offensives. However, local offensive actions with limited gains did, of course, take place.
As for today, the role of such means as UAVs and, again, the well-known minefields is noticeable. The former prevent both Ukraine and Russia from accumulating the necessary number of troops in the starting areas to carry out strikes, while the latter, i.e., minefields, in combination with field fortifications, prevent a breakthrough of the defense to tactical depth with subsequent access to operational space. And even if this happens, UAVs will be able to disrupt the enemy’s logistics, without which it will not be able to continue its offensive. This is evidenced by the unsuccessful Russian Armed Forces’ offensive in Sumy region after they achieved local successes in its initial stage. It also demonstrates the inability of Russian troops to break through the positions of the Ukrainian Defense Forces near Pokrovsk, Chasiv Yar, Toretsk, and elsewhere.
In this situation, Russia continues to rely on its superior resources compared to those of Ukraine and its Western partners. Please, be reminded that Russia had similar hopes during World War I, until it was destroyed by the revolution but, in fact, by the economic crisis. However, at that time, France, Great Britain, and the United States were its allies, whereas now they are its opponents and Ukraine’s partners. As for resources, they have significantly more.
Thus, the combined economic potential of NATO and EU members providing assistance to Ukraine, including arms supplies, is 25 times greater than that of Russia. Moreover, the American and European defense industries can significantly increase their production, which is already happening, while Russia does not have such an opportunity. According to experts, the Russian military-industrial complex has reached its peak production capacity and is unable to increase it further. On the contrary, it has begun to decline. In particular, in the second quarter of this year, the growth rate of ammunition production fell to zero, and in the third quarter, a decline in physical production volumes is expected.
Due to Russia’s lack of funds to fulfill military orders, military-industrial complex enterprises have begun to close. This has been reported more than once, so it is worth citing just one telling example. Recently, in June, the Kursk Battery Plant, the largest enterprise in this industry, which produces batteries for heavy automotive and armored vehicles, ceased operations. It is also the only plant in Russia that produces batteries for tanks. What does this mean? Decisive successes on the front lines and in the rear?
Vladimir Putin’s hopes for US President Donald Trump, who allegedly agreed with him to divide the world, as well as to destroy NATO, withdraw American troops from Europe, and stop providing aid to Ukraine, thereby forcing it to capitulate, were in vain. It is difficult to find out what caused such expectations. There was probably a whole bunch of stuff going on, like Putin losing touch with reality because of his age, the usual thing in totalitarian countries where dictators only hear what they want to hear, or blind faith in Trump’s campaign promises about Ukraine, which were just political games. But, one way or another, none of what the Kremlin hoped for came true. Trump had no intention of sharing the world with him and always treated Russia as a secondary country, not equal to the USA. And he negotiates spheres of influence in the world not with Russia at all, but with China, which is indeed a leading center of global power.
Trump did not set out to destroy NATO either. On the contrary, he managed to strengthen it by forcing Alliance members to increase their defense spending and supported the common perception of Russia as the main enemy and source of threats to Euro-Atlantic security. This was confirmed by the NATO Summit in The Hague in June this year, which demonstrated the unity of the North Atlantic Alliance in strengthening its opposition to Moscow’s aggressive course.
The same applies to the European Union. At the EU Summit, which followed the NATO leaders’ meeting, Moscow’s policy was recognized as the main challenge to the European community. In view of this, a decision was made to strengthen the European security system as part of the Euro-Atlantic security architecture. At this, both NATO and the EU have adopted large-scale rearmament programs that complement each other. And Donald Trump’s intentions to reduce the USA’s involvement in ensuring European security have only resulted in a certain redistribution of forces to contain China in the Asia-Pacific region, without any significant changes in their presence in the European theater of operations.
The USA continues to provide military and technical aid to Ukraine. Its alleged termination is nothing more than the fantasies of the Russian leadership and blatant misinformation by the media, including, unfortunately, the Ukrainian media. The position and actions of the USA on this issue have already been disclosed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine and other state bodies, and have also been mentioned in our previous publications, so there is no need to repeat them again. It should only be recalled that during the aforementioned NATO and EU Summits, decisions were made to increase the amount of support for our state in strengthening its defense.
Finally, Moscow’s plans to build a “nuclear axis of evil,” which was to include Russia, Iran, and North Korea as its allies and supporters in military expansion, have been thwarted. There are also those who include China in the “axis” of evil, but it only assists the aforementioned countries in their confrontation with the West, without participating directly in it.
Thus, the strikes by Israel and the USA on Iran slowed down its nuclear program, having undermined the country’s overall military power. At the same time, Russia’s refusal to provide assistance to Iran, despite the conclusion of a strategic partnership agreement between them, destroyed the foundations of their alliance. In addition, the actions of Israel and the USA have demonstrated that they do not fear Russia, have no critical motivations to support its interests, and may also oppose it on other issues, as the example of Ukraine already confirms. Some international experts view the military operation by Israel and the USA against Iran as Trump’s preparation for possible military actions against Russia. Of course, this is just a hypothetical assumption, but the signal to Moscow has nevertheless been sent. Not to mention that Russia’s loss of influence over Iran will ultimately destroy its position in the Middle East. This development is the next stage in the destruction of its sphere of influence, which it had managed to build, as already happened in North Africa after the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. The Caucasus and Central Asia may well follow suit.
Under such circumstances, Russia finds itself in a situation where continuing the war against Ukraine will only complicate its internal and external problems with critical consequences and no chance of achieving any positive results for itself. That is why it is forced to look for opportunities to end the war, although it is trying to achieve at least a minimum of its goals. Under such circumstances, Moscow can realistically count only on securing the territories of Ukraine that it has already captured, as well as on our state’s giving up joining NATO. In practice, this could mean its agreement to a “freeze” of the war along the current front line as a prerequisite for the start of preparations for a comprehensive peace agreement. In principle, Ukraine agrees with this. We will consider how beneficial this option is for us later, but for now, let us just assume how possible it is in principle.
As already noted, Moscow has no other choice, although it will continue to stall for time in order to capture as much Ukrainian territory as possible. Its insidious air strikes on our settlements will not stop, as it seeks to compensate for its lack of success on the front lines. However, everything that is currently happening in Russia and around it is increasingly limiting its options for action. The introduction of another package of sanctions on Russian oil exports by the United States could be a critical factor for Russia. According to their author and active proponent, US Senator L. Graham, President D. Trump has apparently agreed to this proposal. A decision on this matter may be made when the US Congress resumes work after July 7 this year. This could become a point of no return for Russia.
Therefore, Moscow may agree to a third round of negotiations with Ukraine even before the aforementioned deadline. In particular, the negotiations are expected to begin the process of agreeing on memoranda or relevant conditions between the parties regarding the suspension of military operations. Currently, their nature is fundamentally different, but the main thing is that this process has begun. It would be good if it turned out to be positive for Ukraine, even though Russia is actively advancing on the front lines and continues to threaten Ukraine and the West.
So, what remains, so to speak, in the balance, and what conclusions can be drawn from this? First, Ukraine’s resilience on the front lines and pressure on Russia from the USA and Europe, which are demanding that Russia cease military action. Second, of course, it will not be easy to achieve this, so Ukraine and its partners will make the necessary efforts. Ultimately, we can still hope for positive developments. Third, conclusions must be based on specific events or actions, not on someone’s biased assessments, including those of Western media, which are largely influenced by Russia. Finally, it is the third round of negotiations that will show whether Russia is capable of conducting a concrete dialogue with Ukraine or, on the contrary, has chosen a path that will lead to its self-destruction as a result of further war.
Oleh Makhno,
Institute of Global Politics
