Looking like a stalemate tbh

I've seen several reports over the last week or so about the ongoing situation in Ukraine and the general vibe seems to be "its looking increasingly like its going to be a stalemate". The fact that Ukraine hasn't been able to make the widely anticipated gains - no matter how unfair this is to Ukraine - has allowed detractors of Ukraine to characterise its assault as a failure & a waste of money.

Whilst I think that this is unfair, it is, however, the way the world works: during the US Civil war, the Confederated States of America wanted to win enough of a victory long enough to get European recognition (and came damn near to doing this). Similarly, in WWs1 & 2 we seem the same pattern: in WW1, the French were obsessed with getting British forces deployed - and wounded - so that the UK government couldn't withdraw. In the 1940s, drawing the US into the conflict was one of the things that Churchill was so determined to achieve - and to achive this, he needed to demonstrate that the country is still in the fight, hence the sinking of the french fleet, the enormously risky evacuation of Dunkirk & the stories about the Blitz Spirit.

As mentioned, it is unfair, but political tides & electoral cycles have an uncaring heartbeat of their own. Had Ukraine been able to demonstrate significant gains - regardless of where they took place - then that would have been the political victory they needed. As it stands, instead of the liberation of a city - which is easy to conceptualise & package to capture peoples attentions - Ukraine has spent political capital, time, money & lives trying to break through the Surovikin line, with minimal successes. It is undeniably a necessary process - and the prize, had it been forthcoming, would have been enormous - but for all the fact that the front-lines have been moved, they have not been punctured.

Added to this are the stories that the Ukrainian government is unable - and not permitted - to consider options other than total victory; there are reports (which could be pro-Russian propaganda, I admit) that Zelinsky will not even talk about the possibility of a winter cease-fire, for fears that it would lead to a longer-term freeze in the current positions.

Whilst this is understandable, the fact is that fighting in Winter is horrible - and currently, Russia is on the defensive, which is a much easier task. As the western powers found in WW1, waiting in a trench & repelling attacks is vastly easier than going over the top - which means that Ukraine wont be husbanding its limited resources to deal with a new Russian offensive in spring.

My fear is that Russia can just sit & wait for Ukraine to exhaust itself - and then they'll march on Kyiv once more at a time of their choosing - when western aid is drying up.

Much better - in my view - to negotiate a ceasefire over winter that pauses the conflict (or better yet, an armistice that brings in direct western military support - similar to the guarantees to S.Korea). History shows that tyrany is very hard to beat on the battlefield - but it is brittle & banal. It can be out lasted.

In my view Ukraine has - should it chose it, won the war - but the price is that it has to accept that it will be a long conflict. They've checked the initial assault & can - with skill & hard work - win the peace, but (from my uninformed & entirely civilian perspective) I do not think that they can prosecute this war to an absolute victory on the battlefield.

They can, however, win the war over the next decade & become a successful, democratic, wealthy & secure nation & reunify in a decades time, when the Putin regime invariably implodes. 

Next UK General Election

...is reported in the Daily Mail as being pencilled in for 31st October 2024.

So we have one year to go of this do-nothing self-enriching solve-nothing plattitude-spouting reactionary knobheads.

Gods, I hope that the government collapses sooner & we can kick out this cabinet of clowns, charlatans & cronies.

But even so. One year.

Don't fuck this up, Labour.