Very important article by Nina L Khrushcheva edited on the beginning of January, hinting which way western public opinion is shifting toward a negotiating settlement of Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Her main morale is that Ukraine must now face reality.
Its military situation is degraded to the point that even if USA and western partners will commit themselves to provide a new round of financial aids, Zelensky has any way a high hurdle on recruiting enough new soldiers.
If NATO member states were to put their boots on the ground in Ukraine would encounter the risk that Russian people would rise up to defend the Motherland and instability would engulf Europe.
So, only diplomacy is remaining. Putin's Russia is far from being on the verge of collapse thus, given that Ukraine cannot reclaim lost territories, NATO should concentrate in bolstering Ukrainian defences while preparing to come on an agreement with the Kremlin.
Khrushcheva, teacher of international relations in New York, is long further from being a Putin's sponsor. She had, in the past, always been sharply criticizing Putin and his behaving on Ukraine.
But now, summing it all, a new narrative is breaking through.
She firstly assesses how the US have always considered Russia as a minor power and a fragile country. Soon after February 2022 Russia should be immediately crumbled because of western sanctions applying on it.
Western observers never seemed able to think of a scenario in which Russia could stand a situational long armed conflict.
She also admits what in western propaganda is, by all means, still concealed: when Russia’s initial offensive didn't make progress, Boris Johnson – then UK Prime Minister, convinced Zelensky that no peace should be signed. Ukraine was to just continue fighting. Russia would lose the war, western officials thought. So, they assured the Ukrainian government a massive support in weapons and financial resources, which they effectively did.
But they didn't imagine that demonising Russia would trigger a galvanisation of Russian people against the west. Furthermore, Russian state was capable of thriving its war industry and resisting to economic pressures. On the battlefield, Russia aimed to a successive adaptational strategy. In the end, Putin didn't suffer of a falling approval rating.
Nowadays, Ukrainian western backers are beginning to lose their determination. Yet another round of billions and a new military-aid package are requested, but approval procedures are in stall. Biden still is preaching that the US will be side by side with Zelensky and Russia will be finally crumbling but in reality, writes Khrushcheva, “Putin will throw everything he has at this war—and will likely maintain considerable popular support along the way”.
Meanwhile, a crack seems to be forming between Zelensky and the Ukrainian military’s commander-in-chief, General Zaluzhny.
So, we are in the three possible scenarios outlined above.
Only, I fear, we should ask ourselves if Putin's Russia is now agreeing on a negotiating table. Khrushcheva disregards the case for Russian mistrust: after the west (in fact, USA and UK) has behaved in a manner that all tempted ceasing fire deals were boycotted, why should Putin and Lavrov trust its word? Why trust in politicians who demonstrated their only goal is to delete you?