Como derrotar a Rússia em sua guerra de agressão contra a Ucrânia - Anton Geraschenko

Como derrotar a Rússia em sua guerra de agressão contra a Ucrânia 

Anton Geraschenko, 5/12/2023

“The Soviet Union lost about 15,000 soldiers dead in Afghanistan over 10  years. In the First Chechen war, the number of Russian casualties  amounted to 5,000-14,000 in almost two years (estimates differ). In both  cases, USSR/Russia acknowledged their defeat and left (with Chechnya,  Russia returned three years later). 

Russian losses due to their  aggression in Ukraine already amount to hundreds of thousands. Yet,  Putin shows no intention to stop, and Russians seem to be OK with that.

Both  Ukrainian military leadership (this was confirmed by the  Commander-in-Chief Zaluzhny) and our allies assumed that there is a  certain number of losses that Russia will consider unacceptable. Then,  either Russian leadership would make the political decision to look for  ways to exit the conflict or the Russian population would somehow revolt  against such a huge number of pointless deaths (e.g., in both  Afghanistan and Chechen wars, committees of soldiers' mothers were  eventually an influential power).

As we now know, these  assumptions were wrong. The Kremlin regime has mostly mobilized and  recruited men from the poorer parts of Russian society where the value  of human life is smaller than the chance to receive a free Lada car.

In  the same logic, our Western allies also believed that Russian  authorities would somehow be more pragmatic and rational. So their idea  was to "make the war too costly for Putin" (with sanctions, for example)  but at the same time not to threaten Putin and allow him to keep a good  face. "Making the war too costly" assumes that there is a "price" after  which the war is recognized as "unprofitable" and the regime then would  look for a way out.

(In many instances, this position remains strong among our allies).

The  logic of the Kremlin regime is completely different. There is no  "acceptable" or "unacceptable" price, there is only victory or defeat.  The Kremlin has decided that winning the war is the only way for the  current regime to retain power, and for the people at the top to stay  alive and free. Thus, defeat in the war is a "point of no return" and  any price of victory is acceptable.

What to do, then? First -  accept the new reality. Then, look for the enemy's weak points that are  more valuable and painful to them than loss of cannon fodder.

Undermining  and lessening Russia's combat potential still remains a key task. When  given the right tools, Ukraine is very effective at that. Therefore,  Ukraine needs to receive what we need - in full amounts and on time.  Some decisions might need to be reconsidered (like forbidding strikes on  Russian territory. Such strikes would undermine Russian logistics  significantly and would save a lot of Ukrainian lives).

Sanctions still remain a key area. Closing loopholes that are used to circumvent them is crucial.

While  Russia remains in its current state, it will continue being a threat to  the security of the region, the whole world and itself. The imperial  behemoth is incapable of real change, which plays into the hands of  Putin's regime. 

Ukrainian victory must mean Russia's defeat, not  deterrence. That is a crucial paradigm shift that would allow to end  this war sustainably and not just be a ceasefire to restore Russia's  military potential.”

Source: Yevhen Dykyj, Ukrainian military analyst, and thoughts and comments from Anton Geraschenko