The American Responsible Statecraft magazine, affiliated with the Washington DC, based The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, published saying that an eternal or prolonged war is brewing in Ukraine.

The failure of the Ukrainian counter offensive that aimed to control large territories that Russia managed to take since the start of it Moscow called it “Military operation” in Ukraine, didn’t went well.

And with the “extremist rhetoric” that the US government and NATO alliance have been using since last year to persuade the public to fund open military support, the war in Ukraine could become a protracted conflict lasting several more years.

The Ukraine’s goal of regaining all the territories controlled by Russia is lost seems far-fetched.

These analyzes have recently intensified in the US press, as the Financial Times newspaper reported, last Saturday, that US officials are increasingly preparing for what looks like a war of attrition that will continue until next year.

The Wall Street Journal published a report, stating that military strategists and policy makers throughout the West have already begun to think about the spring offensive next year, and how to prepare for a long-term conflict.

On August 10, an unnamed senior official told CNN, “We don’t know how long this war will last, but the White House wouldn’t be shy about returning to Congress after the first quarter next year, if we feel we need to do that”.

The Russians also feel the same way, as the former Russian President and Vice President of the Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, recently said that “if it takes years or even decades, so be it”.

The Responsible Statecraft magazine asked a question: If Ukraine achieves any victory or progress on the battlefields, will this lead to the end of the war?

The answer was given by the US Magazine, as even if Kiev carried out a successful operation against Russian forces in the future, the end of the war wouldn’t be guaranteed.

For example, Moscow might decide to launch its own counterattack, to erase any gains made by Ukrainian forces, and possibly start an endless cycle of military wrangling.

That type of “Protracted War” was what some NATO officials, at least initially, hoped for.

Back in March 2022, only few days after the Russian invasion started, the New York Times said that the NATO leadership is seeking to help Ukraine trap Russia in a quagmire similar to the quagmire of Afghanistan.

However, the Responsible Statecraft magazine explained, that a “Protracted War” wouldn’t benefit Ukraine, which has already suffered huge human and economic costs and is falling more and more in debt with each passing month.

That so-called protracted war wouldn’t be beneficial to the rest of the world either, fueled by cost-of-living shocks all over the world on the one hand, and on the other hand, fueled by the transformation of a “catastrophic war” between NATO and Russia that was avoided twice, into a broader confrontation that reaches a nuclear war.

Share it...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *