Daniel Davis, who has been a persistent skeptic of Ukraine’s chances in its war against Russian aggression, noting that Ukraine’s counteroffensive did not accomplish much in a piece at Responsible Statecraft:
If Ukraine was unable to break the Russian defensive lines after four full months of effort, after six full months of preparation, after receiving over $46 billion in military backing, and considerable training and intelligence support, by what logic can supporters of additional aid argue that giving another multi-billion dollar package will succeed where all previous efforts have failed? There is none.
There is no likely path to a Ukrainian military victory, regardless of how much money Congress allocates, how many tanks we provide, or how many artillery shells we produce. It is time to acknowledge this obvious on-the-ground truth and seek out other pathways forward.
I continue to believe that the U. S. should provide material support to Ukraine but not to achieve a military victory. On that I am in agreement with Lt. Col. Davis. I believe we should continue to support Ukraine to avert a humanitarian crisis, prevent Russia from winning outright, and use whatever influence our aid provides us to encourage Ukraine to seek a settlement less than the total victory they have promoted as their objective.
I also think we need to have civilians auditing Ukraine’s use of the support we’re providing but that’s a different subject.
The reality is that we do not have the ability to come remotely close to ensuring Ukraine can win this war – at least not on a foreseeable time scale. Those who have pushed aid packages and sold them as a way to allow Ukraine to win played the short game and have lost credibility, which will make the kind of long-term sustainable support to Ukraine more difficult.