As Russia approaches a grim milestone, Putin projects confidence - Nathan Hodge (CNN)

As Russia approaches a grim milestone, Putin projects confidence

Nathan Hodge

CNN, 31/12/2025

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/12/31/europe/russia-ukraine-putin-confident-zelensky-intl?cid=ios_app

Russia is approaching a grim milestone: by mid-January, President Vladimir Putin’s “special military operation” in Ukraine will have dragged on longer than the war on the Eastern Front that began with the German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941 and ended with the fall of Berlin in May 1945.

Putin is famously obsessed with World War II and official veneration of the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany is part of the ideological glue that holds together the Russian state. Putin’s Russia has even seen the rehabilitation of Josef Stalin, the Communist dictator who presided over a ruthless purge in the 1930s before leading his country in what is known in Russia as the Great Patriotic War.

But nearly four years after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a decisive victory over Kyiv eludes the Kremlin leader: Russia controls about 20% of Ukrainian territory, the war is estimated to have cost Moscow more than a million casualties, and in perhaps the biggest affront to Putin’s war aims, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky remains in power.

But as the year comes to an end, Putin is projecting confidence that time is on his side and that winning is inevitable. Ahead of a summit with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in December, Putin gave an interview with India Today where he said Russia would “liberate Donbas and Novorossiya in any case – by military or other means,” doubling down on his demand to acquire all the regions of Ukraine that Russia claims, including those that his troops have not managed to take by force.

And that bloody-mindedness seems to be a bargaining strategy. Putin is surely aware that US President Donald Trump is determined to reach a deal on Ukraine and the Russian leader has done everything in his power to extract the maximum gain from Washington’s eagerness to end the conflict.

In his year-end press conference, the Russian president said his country was ready and willing “to finish the conflict by peaceful means” — but not without boasting that his forces were “advancing across the whole of the front line.”

And a few days later, in his traditional televised New Year’s Eve address, Putin urged Russians to “support our heroes” fighting in Ukraine, adding, “We believe in you and in our victory!”

utin’s reasons for projecting swagger are clear. For starters, the Kremlin leader has been able to watch as a once-unified Western front supporting Kyiv showed serious fractures after Trump took office in January.

In February, US Vice President JD Vance stunned European leaders at the Munich Security Conference with a speech excoriating Washington’s transatlantic allies. That spectacle was followed by a very public dressing-down of Zelensky by Trump and Vance in the Oval Office.

A few months later, another public-relations coup for the Kremlin followed with the summit meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, between Putin and Trump. While the summit fell short of yielding a thaw in US-Russian relations, it was more than a photo opportunity for Putin: The Russian president was able to play for more time in his relentless war of attrition against Ukraine.

But Putin’s apparent reluctance to engage more seriously in peace efforts after Anchorage did eventually test Trump’s patience. An invitation to a second US-Russian bilateral summit in Budapest fell through and the Trump administration slapped sanctions on Russia’s two largest oil companies. The US president, who often has words of praise for Putin, expressed frustration with his Russian counterpart.

Still, enough ice appears to have been broken between Washington and Moscow to allow an unconventional US diplomatic effort led by Trump’s former business associate Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner to advance.

Following Witkoff and Kushner’s visit to the Kremlin in early December, a flurry of high-level diplomacy involving Zelensky and European leaders ensued, with much talk about hammering out the finer points of a potential agreement.

By mid-December, Trump’s prognosis was optimistic, with the US president telling reporters that “we’re closer now than we have been, ever” to a peace deal.

But at year’s end, Putin still appears to occupy the role of potential dealbreaker: While Zelensky gained an audience with Trump at Mar-a-Lago last weekend to talk through a revised peace deal, the Kremlin leader bookended that meeting with his own phone calls to the American president.

And the Russian position on peace talks now appears to be hardening. In his conversation with Trump on Monday, Putin informed his American counterpart about an alleged Ukrainian drone attack on his Valdai residence in Novgorod region, according to a readout given to Russian state radio by Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also telegraphed outrage over the claimed attack – which Zelensky dismissed as “a complete fabrication” – by saying that “Russia’s negotiating position will be revised” amid the ongoing peace process.

Some Kremlin-watchers are skeptical about Putin accepting a deal that would cross any of his red lines. The contours of such a deal are still emerging, but the Russian side has long been clear about the main sticking points.

Most recently, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Sergey Ryabkov reiterated them in an interview with ABC News: No surrender of any Ukrainian territory that Moscow lays claim to, and no NATO boots on the ground in Ukraine after the war ends.

“Lavrov, Ushakov, (Kremlin spokesman Dmitry) Peskov, and Putin himself (who has visibly ramped up engagements with the military while doubling down on ‘we will achieve our goals’) have made it clear that the revised plan is entirely unacceptable. Yet Washington continues engaging Kyiv, touting ‘progress’ that Moscow views as illusory,” Russian political observer Tatiana Stanovaya wrote on X after the latest talks in Mar-a-Lago.

“This is precisely what the Russian story about a drone attack on Putin’s residence is about: a forceful ‘pound on the table’ to make the West finally hear that the current peace negotiations are heading in a completely unacceptable direction for Moscow and to derail the emerging US-Ukrainian framework,” she said.

Putin has Trump’s ear but he has not succeeded yet in drowning out those competing voices. How much of the Kremlin’s confidence is smoke and mirrors is the big question.

In November, Putin donned camouflage to pay a visit to a military command post in an undisclosed location, where the commander-in-chief of Russia’s military, Gen. Valery Gerasimov, claimed Russian troops were in control of the eastern town of Kupiansk.

Just a few weeks later, Putin was upstaged by Zelensky, who posted a video of a visit to Kupiansk, wearing body armor and standing in front of a pockmarked – and very geolocatable – sign. Asked later about the video during his year-end press conference, Putin was dismissive, mocking the Ukrainian president as “a talented artist” engaged in theatrics.

The mood in Russia is hard to gauge – criticizing the military can land a person in jail – and the economy keeps lumbering along, despite slowing growth and a Ukrainian campaign of strikes on Russian energy infrastructure, the cornerstone of Moscow’s economic power.

Yet Putin’s unchallenged grip on power gives him leverage in any peace process. The graveyards in provincial Russia may continue to grow with war dead, but no parliament can pressure him, no political opposition seems to threaten him and an apparently passive population means he can continue his war on Ukraine.

Ukraine’s Zelensky offers peace concessions – and puts the ball in Putin’s court - Victoria Butenko, Nathan Hodge (CNN World)

Ukraine’s Zelensky offers peace concessions – and puts the ball in Putin’s court 

Victoria Butenko and Nathan Hodge (CNN World)

CNN Wordl, Dec 24, 2024

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/12/24/europe/ukraine-zelensky-peace-concessions-intl?cid=ios_app

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signaled new willingness to make concessions on several key negotiating points that have threatened to stall a nascent peace process with Moscow, effectively putting the ball in Russia’s court.

In an unusually candid and wide-ranging meeting with reporters Tuesday, Zelensky gave new details about a 20-point plan that he described as “a foundational document on ending the war, a political document between us, America, Europe, and the Russians.” The Ukrainian president also discussed specifics of security guarantees between Ukraine, the United States and European countries that would form a crucial part of any peace deal with Russia.

Zelensky said he expected to receive a response from Moscow Wednesday after the US side engages with the Kremlin.

The draft 20-point agreement represents a slimmed-down version of an original 28-point plan the US previously discussed with the Russian side. In his remarks, Zelensky outlined what the Ukrainian side says would be an acceptable compromise for withdrawing its troops from portions of the Donetsk region of eastern Ukraine that are currently not held by Russian forces.

That area includes the “fortress belt” of fortified Ukrainian cities such as Kramatorsk and Sloviansk in Donetsk region that currently stand in the way of any potential Russian advance deeper into the heart of Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Ukraine must effectively cede all of Donetsk for a peace plan to work.

Detailing his country’s position, the Ukrainian president said Russia would have to engage in a withdrawal of its forces equivalent to ground ceded by Ukrainian troops, effectively establishing a demilitarized zone around some of the present front lines.

“If we establish a free economic zone here, and it envisages a virtually demilitarized zone, – meaning heavy forces are removed from this area – and the distance, for example, is 40 kilometers (it could be five, 10, or 40 kilometers) – then if these two cities, Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, are our free economic zone, the Russians would have to pull back their troops accordingly by five, 10, or 40 kilometers,” Zelensky said.

Key points of draft plan

Among the other key points of the draft plan outlined by Zelensky, including proposed revisions by Kyiv:

• An affirmation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and a non-aggression agreement between Russia and Ukraine;

• Security guarantees provided to Ukraine by the United States, NATO, and European states that Zelensky said would “mirror Article 5” – NATO’s cornerstone principle of mutual self-defense. The plan would call for a military response and reinstatement of sanctions on Moscow if Russia invades Ukraine, but the guarantees would be rescinded if Ukraine launches an attack on Russia or opens fire on Russian territory without provocation;

• A development package to support Ukraine’s postwar economic recovery, including establishment of a Ukraine Development Fund to invest in technology, data centers, and artificial intelligence as well as investment in Ukraine’s natural gas sector by US companies. Zelensky estimated the overall economic losses caused by the war to be $800 billion;

• A compromise proposal for the operation of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, currently held by Russia. Zelensky said Ukraine proposes the plant would be operated by a joint enterprise between the US and Ukraine, with 50% of the electricity output going to Ukraine and the remainder allocated by the US;

• The withdrawal of Russian troops from the Dnipropetrovsk, Mykolaiv, Sumy, and Kharkiv regions of Ukraine;

• A legally binding agreement, with implementation monitored and guaranteed by a Peace Council chaired by US President Donald Trump; and

• A full ceasefire taking effect immediately once all parties agree to the deal.

Control of territory is the most complex point of any deal, along with the potential sequencing of events. Zelensky also spoke at length about a potential nationwide referendum in Ukraine that would formalize the end of the war.

“People could then choose: does this ending suit us, or does it not?” he said. “That would be the referendum. A referendum requires at least 60 days. And we need a real ceasefire for 60 days; otherwise, we cannot hold it. In other words, the referendum would not be legitimate.

People living in territories controlled by Russia, Zelensky said, cannot be expected to cast a fair vote.

“But in the territory we control, where a legal and fair referendum can actually be conducted, the voting and preparation process – just as, by the way, with the potential elections our partners talk about – must take place under secure conditions,” he said. “Without security, legitimacy is in question as well. We explain all of this to our partners.”

Ukraine has been under pressure to hold elections as soon as possible after an agreement is signed. Putin has long maintained that the government in Kyiv is not legitimate and that Ukraine must hold elections for a peace deal to work. Zelensky’s presidential term expired in 2024, but elections cannot be held under martial law that was imposed after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Those wartime measures have been upheld by the Ukrainian parliament.

The Trump administration’s peace effort – led by US special envoy Steve Witkoff and US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner – has been slowly inching forward in recent weeks. Over the weekend, a Ukrainian delegation led by Ukrainian National Security Secretary Rustem Umerov and Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev met separately with their American counterparts in talks that Witkoff described as “constructive and productive.”

Speaking to reporters Wednesday on a conference call, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Dmitriev gave Putin “a detailed briefing on the results of his trip to Miami. Based on this information, Moscow will formulate its next steps and continue contacts in the very near future through existing channels.”

Peskov declined to discuss specifics, saying Moscow considered it “counterproductive” to discuss negotiations in the press.

 

Guerra na Ucrânia não saiu como o planejado, mas “putinismo” segue vivo - Nathan Hodge (CNN)

 Análise: Guerra na Ucrânia não saiu como o planejado, mas “putinismo” segue vivo

De acordo com cálculos do Pentágono, invasão deixou mais de 70 mil soldados russos mortos ou feridos

Nathan Hodge, da CNN, 24/08/2022

Seis meses se passaram desde que o presidente russo, Vladimir Putin, lançou sua invasão não provocada da Ucrânia, uma guerra que por qualquer medida convencional tem sido uma calamidade.

Milhões de ucranianos foram deslocados. A cidade de Mariupol foi quase apagada do mapa. E a ofensiva lançada em 24 de fevereiro mostrou a podridão moral dentro das forças armadas russas e seu completo desrespeito pelas vidas civis.

Pelos últimos cálculos do Pentágono, a invasão custou à Rússia entre 70 mil e 80 mil soldados mortos e feridos. Mesmo que essa estimativa seja alta, é justo extrapolar que a Rússia provavelmente viu mais tropas morrerem em meio ano de combates na Ucrânia do que os soviéticos perderam em uma década de guerra no Afeganistão.

Mas quaisquer comparações da Rússia de Putin com os dias de declínio da União Soviética são prematuras. A Rússia realmente mudou desde 24 de fevereiro, mas as rachaduras no edifício do Putinismo são difíceis de discernir. A maioria dos russos – se não abertamente – apoiou a guerra, ou concordou silenciosamente com sua campanha de restauração imperial.

As avaliações do líder do Kremlin não foram afetadas pela guerra. Tanto o instituto de pesquisas estadual WCIOM quanto a agência independente Levada-Center rotineiramente colocam os índices de aprovação de Putin acima de 80% desde o início da guerra em 24 de fevereiro.

Como Putin está mantendo seus índices de aprovação?
É tentador concluir que esses números simplesmente refletem o poder da propaganda estatal da Rússia e sua capacidade estonteante de construir uma realidade alternativa, na qual os navios de guerra russos não são afundados por mísseis ucranianos e as bases russas explodem por acidente.

Afinal, o governo russo agiu rapidamente após a invasão para encerrar o que restava da imprensa livre da Rússia, introduzindo uma nova lei draconiana que impunha severas penalidades criminais para informações “falsas” que desacreditassem suas forças armadas.

Mas isso não significa que nenhuma informação está sendo divulgada sobre as perdas desastrosas da Rússia na Ucrânia. O site de notícias independente russo Mediazona – que foi rotulado como “agente estrangeiro” no ano passado pelas autoridades russas – documentou 5.185 mortes de militares, com base em reportagens locais e postagens nas mídias sociais.

As classes médias relativamente abastadas do país provavelmente foram isoladas do preço da guerra. Muitos dos mortos em ação são de regiões mais pobres da Rússia; as regiões com o maior número de vítimas documentadas são as chamadas “repúblicas étnicas” do Daguestão e da Buriácia, segundo a Mediazona. Por outro lado, vítimas das duas cidades mais ricas e populosas da Rússia – Moscou e São Petersburgo – foram relativamente baixos, informou.

A popularidade de Putin às vezes é atribuída a um clima de medo e conformidade. De acordo com o OVD-Info, um grupo independente que rastreia detenções na Rússia, 16.380 pessoas foram presas ou detidas por ativismo antiguerra na Rússia e 75 casos criminais foram abertos sob a lei de “notícias falsas” da Rússia.

Sem surpresa, a invasão da Ucrânia pela Rússia reviveu a discussão entre os estudiosos sobre se o regime de Putin deve ou não ser rotulado como fascista. Isso pode parecer em grande parte uma questão de taxonomia, mas aponta para uma realidade clara: depois de 24 de fevereiro, termos como “autocrático” ou “autoritário” são inadequados para descrever um Estado que não tolera dissidência interna.

A opinião pública vai mudar?
Dito isso, alguns observadores se perguntam por quanto tempo Putin pode contar com o apoio de amplos segmentos do público russo em meio a duras sanções internacionais que isolaram a Rússia da economia global e reduziram drasticamente a oferta de importações. O investimento ocidental fugiu em grande parte do país.

Setores da economia como a aviação, que há muito dependem de aeronaves fabricadas nos EUA ou na Europa, foram duramente atingidos.

Como observou recentemente Clare Sebastian, da CNN, Putin e seus tecnocratas trabalharam durante anos para tornar a economia russa à prova de sanções, por meio da substituição de importações – desenvolvendo substitutos locais para produtos importados – e desenvolvendo um sistema de pagamentos para evitar o isolamento financeiro.

E a Rússia transformou a estranha mudança de marca do McDonalds e da Starbucks em contos de resiliência econômica.

Mas um estudo recente do Chief Executive Leadership Institute da Yale School of Management mostra um quadro mais terrível.

Os autores do estudo argumentam que a Rússia não tem infraestrutura para simplesmente girar as exportações de energia, como gás natural, para a Ásia; Os fabricantes russos carecem de peças de fornecedores internacionais; e que as estatísticas oficiais da Rússia estão encobrindo a profundidade do recuo econômico da Rússia.

“Apesar dos delírios de autossuficiência e substituição de importações de Putin, a produção doméstica russa parou completamente sem capacidade de substituir negócios, produtos e talentos perdidos”, diz o relatório. “O esvaziamento da base de inovação e produção doméstica da Rússia levou à alta dos preços e à angústia do consumidor.

Ainda assim, o sistema financeiro da Rússia não entrou em colapso e a ansiedade do consumidor não se traduziu em agitação política. Para a Ucrânia e seus apoiadores, a conversa agora mudou para encontrar maneiras de infligir dor aos russos por seu apoio passivo a Putin.

“Estamos trabalhando em novas sanções contra a Rússia e em estimular os cidadãos do Estado terrorista a sentirem sua parcela de responsabilidade pelo que está acontecendo”, disse o presidente ucraniano, Volodymyr Zelensky, em um discurso recente. “A discussão sobre restrições de visto na Europa para portadores de passaporte russo está se expandindo a cada dia, novos estados e novos políticos estão se juntando a ela”.

Não está claro se uma proibição de visto acabaria mudando o comportamento russo. Alguns líderes europeus – mais notavelmente o chanceler alemão, Olaf Scholz – têm relutado em endossar a proibição. Falando em uma recente entrevista coletiva em Oslo, Scholz disse a repórteres que os líderes precisam ser “muito claros” sobre a questão da proibição de vistos, já que as ações na Ucrânia são “a guerra de Putin” e “não a guerra do povo russo”.

E enquanto Putin pode ser o “decisor”, tomando emprestado um termo do ex-presidente George W. Bush, há também um Putin coletivo que o apoia e ajuda a realizar suas políticas. Quaisquer que sejam as consequências econômicas das sanções, os oligarcas leais de Putin não romperam as fileiras.

“A guerra de Putin com a Ucrânia já dura 6 meses”, escreveu o líder da oposição russa, Alexey Navalny, no que chamou de “fio de raiva” atrás das grades. “Desde o primeiro dia, os líderes ocidentais afirmaram com firmeza que os oligarcas e os subornados de Putin enfrentariam sanções iminentes e não escapariam desta vez. Mas escaparam”.

É uma imagem sombria e sugere que Putin – que já sobreviveu ao esnobar de líderes mundiais antes – está disposto a jogar um longo jogo aqui. Ele talvez esteja contando com o fato de que, nos próximos seis meses, os europeus pagarão preços mais altos pela energia, aumentando potencialmente a pressão sobre os governos para pressionar a Ucrânia a se submeter a um acordo de paz. O inverno pode estar chegando, mas os ucranianos também estão lutando pela sobrevivência nacional.

https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/internacional/analise-guerra-na-ucrania-nao-saiu-como-o-planejado-mas-putinismo-segue-vivo/