A month in, Ukraine's spring counteroffensive is struggling against entrenched Russian forces and appears to have entered a near-frozen state, where neither side is making significant ground gains. That's renewing debate about whether now is the time to negotiate an end to the conflict.
The idea of an armistice is controversial because many experts don't believe Russian President Vladimir Putin will ever give up his ambition to control all of Ukraine and could never be trusted.
"Russia will break any agreement that it makes," said Ian Garner, an adjunct assistant professor of political studies at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont., who has analyzed Russian war propaganda.
"The history of negotiating with Vladimir Putin for the past 22 years has been a history of broken promises. The Russian state is brutally corrupt, increasingly attached to militarism and increasingly untrustworthy."
Still, the argument fills the pages of the respected Foreign Policy magazine, where dueling headlines proclaim the conflict in Ukraine is an "Unwinnable War" and negotiations are the only realistic endgame, countered by the claim that "Russia Can Only Be Stopped On The Battlefield."
"This is not an either-or situation," said retired U.S. colonel Mark F. Cancian. "A negotiated settlement will reflect the situation on the battlefield. Even if one side achieves a decisive win, the negotiations will codify that situation."
Russia's military campaign is going nowhere, but Putin may well believe he can wait out the West's support of Ukraine in a war of attrition.
Republicans in the U.S. Congress have grown impatient with the expensive transfers of weapons. Donald Trump, who has shown friendliness toward Russia in the past and is again running for president in 2024 shares similar views.
Next year's presidential and congressional elections in the U.S. could fundamentally alter the West's support for Ukraine's defence.
Some Western European politicians have also quietly nudged Ukrainian officials toward talks this year, especially since neither side has gained much ground in the last nine months, and Ukraine's current action is sputtering.
"We will know in about another month when the results of the Ukrainian counteroffensive become clear," said Cancian of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. "So far, progress has been disappointing, steady but slow."
Of course, Russia's army is hardly in great shape.
Its spring offensive cost tens of thousands of Russian lives, with little to show for it beyond the symbolic win at Bakhmut – which Ukrainian forces have since successfully chipped away at with their own counteroffensive.
Russian forces are exhausted, senior commanders are being replaced for insubordination, following a mutiny by the head of the Wagner mercenary group.
Western assessments suggest the Kremlin has lost so many soldiers and equipment, it would be unable to launch another offensive this year. But Russia did use the winter to build hundreds of kilometres of trenches, tank ditches and other defences, which have so far kept Ukraine from finding a weak spot in the Russian frontline through which to pour thousands of their own Western-equipped soldiers.
"They have extensive entrenchments," said Michael Kofman, one of the top U.S. analysts on Russia's armed forces, on his War on the Rocks podcast.
"They're digging fresh trenches every day and putting down more mines … the challenge is significant, to put it mildly."
There is no question Ukraine has also lost significant equipment and personnel. Accurate figures are a closely guarded secret, but certainly thousands of soldiers have been killed while tanks, artillery guns and infantry fighting vehicles have been destroyed.
"War is not like it is in the movies," Kofman said. "War is messy. It's ugly. And you aren't going to see images of hundreds of [Ukrainian] tanks crossing Russian lines."
The idea of an armistice is controversial because many experts don't believe Russian President Vladimir Putin will ever give up his ambition to control all of Ukraine and could never be trusted.
"Russia will break any agreement that it makes," said Ian Garner, an adjunct assistant professor of political studies at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont., who has analyzed Russian war propaganda.
"The history of negotiating with Vladimir Putin for the past 22 years has been a history of broken promises. The Russian state is brutally corrupt, increasingly attached to militarism and increasingly untrustworthy."
Still, the argument fills the pages of the respected Foreign Policy magazine, where dueling headlines proclaim the conflict in Ukraine is an "Unwinnable War" and negotiations are the only realistic endgame, countered by the claim that "Russia Can Only Be Stopped On The Battlefield."
Talk now or hold out for more gains
Wars are nearly always ended at a negotiating table, so the debate is really about timing: Should the two sides enter into talks now or wait, each gambling on the belief that they can take more ground and be in a stronger position to negotiate later?"This is not an either-or situation," said retired U.S. colonel Mark F. Cancian. "A negotiated settlement will reflect the situation on the battlefield. Even if one side achieves a decisive win, the negotiations will codify that situation."
Russia's military campaign is going nowhere, but Putin may well believe he can wait out the West's support of Ukraine in a war of attrition.
Republicans in the U.S. Congress have grown impatient with the expensive transfers of weapons. Donald Trump, who has shown friendliness toward Russia in the past and is again running for president in 2024 shares similar views.
Next year's presidential and congressional elections in the U.S. could fundamentally alter the West's support for Ukraine's defence.
Some Western European politicians have also quietly nudged Ukrainian officials toward talks this year, especially since neither side has gained much ground in the last nine months, and Ukraine's current action is sputtering.
"We will know in about another month when the results of the Ukrainian counteroffensive become clear," said Cancian of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. "So far, progress has been disappointing, steady but slow."
Kilometres of trenches have staved off counteroffensive
Warning: This section contains an image of a dead bodyOf course, Russia's army is hardly in great shape.
Its spring offensive cost tens of thousands of Russian lives, with little to show for it beyond the symbolic win at Bakhmut – which Ukrainian forces have since successfully chipped away at with their own counteroffensive.
Russian forces are exhausted, senior commanders are being replaced for insubordination, following a mutiny by the head of the Wagner mercenary group.
Western assessments suggest the Kremlin has lost so many soldiers and equipment, it would be unable to launch another offensive this year. But Russia did use the winter to build hundreds of kilometres of trenches, tank ditches and other defences, which have so far kept Ukraine from finding a weak spot in the Russian frontline through which to pour thousands of their own Western-equipped soldiers.
"They have extensive entrenchments," said Michael Kofman, one of the top U.S. analysts on Russia's armed forces, on his War on the Rocks podcast.
"They're digging fresh trenches every day and putting down more mines … the challenge is significant, to put it mildly."
There is no question Ukraine has also lost significant equipment and personnel. Accurate figures are a closely guarded secret, but certainly thousands of soldiers have been killed while tanks, artillery guns and infantry fighting vehicles have been destroyed.
"War is not like it is in the movies," Kofman said. "War is messy. It's ugly. And you aren't going to see images of hundreds of [Ukrainian] tanks crossing Russian lines."
