The editors of the Washington Post caution us not to expect too much from the Ukrainian counter-offensive:
Unlike many TV series, most military battles do not feature tidy endings. The long history of warfare includes few fights that conclusively settled the larger struggle, which is why we know the names of the relative handful that did: Yorktown, Waterloo, Hastings.
That’s a useful historical context for considering Ukraine’s long-telegraphed counteroffensive against Russia’s heavily dug-in forces, which might begin in the coming days or weeks — depending partly on how long it takes for fields to dry after heavy spring rains. Much as it might frustrate Ukraine’s allies, its chances of a decisive victory, let alone a quick one, are rated by most analysts as slim. The West should prepare to continue supporting Ukraine even if the counteroffensive’s results are meager.
while in another editorial they quote the head of NATO:
I’m absolutely confident that the strong U.S. bipartisan support for Ukraine will remain, not least because this is in the security interest of the United States. A strong NATO is good for Europe, and support for Ukraine is also good for the United States, especially when we see the security challenges posed by China.
I suspect that the Ukrainian counter-offensive will influence that support.
