Mark Episkopos repeats a point I have made for going on two years at Responsible Statecraft:
A purely cartographical view of the Ukraine war neglects key military factors, including differentials in manpower and resources, attrition rates, and logistics challenges, that many experts say are not unfolding in Ukraine’s favor.
“Despite everything that’s happened, despite all the stuff we have given, the Bradley’s, the M1 [Abrams] tanks, Patriot air defense systems, the Challenger tanks, the Leopard [tanks], all those things, nothing changed at all except the casualty count,†said former U.S. Army Lt. Col. Daniel Davis, Senior Fellow and Military Expert at Defense Priorities and host of the Daniel Davis Deep Dive.
“While the lines haven’t changed, I don’t call it a stalemate because I think time is continuing to work against Ukraine,†he said in an interview, noting the stark year-on-year decline in U.S. military aid to Ukraine.
What’s worse something between 15% and 30% of Ukraine’s population has fled the country. Of those 2/3s are women, many of them young. Unless they return to Ukraine soon, it is quite possible that the next generation of Ukrainians will be small and the longer the Ukrainian refugees are gone, the less likely they will be to return. Russia isn’t Ukraine’s only problem.
Dr. Episkopos concludes:
Whether the Kremlin continues to bleed Ukraine white or opts for large-scale offensives, there is a salient threat that, in the absence of diplomatic off-ramps, Russia’s growing advantages may eventually reach a critical mass and translate into the ability to impose a grim fait accompli on Kyiv and its Western partners.
Russia has always had advantages in manpower and materials. I think that is why most analysts thought they would quickly win a war. But, while this isn’t the same kind of war, IIRC, Russia ended up leaving Afghanistan so who knows how it ends. Ukraine seems pretty motivated.
Steve