Ukraine’s “Victory Plan” Is Delusional

In the past two years the western establishment media has effectively obscured the reality on the ground in Ukraine.  Only recently has it become clear to the public that the tales we’ve heard about Russia imploding due to “bad tactics” and “throwing bodies into the meat grinder” in exchange for irrelevant territory have all been a fantasy.  The problem is, propagandists often end up believing their own propaganda and then they are caught completely by surprise down the road when reality slaps them in the face.

Russian offensive actions in the east have greatly accelerated and now in the south the vital city of Vuhledar is set to fall within a couple days (if it hasn’t already).  Their attrition based strategy and artillery superiority have created a shield for small fast moving units to strike Ukraine’s trenches and fixed defenses, and their drone game has dramatically improved.  This has led them to capture multiple towns and cities in the past three months, with their forces closing in on the key eastern operational base of Pokrovsk.  If Pokrovsk falls, the entire east of Ukraine could easily fall.

Beyond the shift to attrition tactics, Russia is gaining territory quickly because Ukraine is low on manpower.  No amount of NATO technology or weaponry is going to help this fundamental weakness.  This is the reality in Ukraine; they are losing the war.

The western media is unable to gloss over the situation any longer, which means something dramatic will have to happen to change the course of the war in Ukraine’s favor.  Their government is scrambling to initiate an October surprise in preparation for the US elections in November.  The US runs NATO, and Ukraine is entirely dependent on US aid.  

The notion of a Ukrainian “Victory Plan” is by itself questionable given the circumstances, but what is reportedly contained in Vladimir Zelensky’s strategy seems to be a over-optimistic wish list relying heavily on escalation between NATO and Russia.  In other words, the only way Ukraine can “win” is for NATO to engage in open warfare with the East.

While the full plan hasn’t been divulged, senior U.S. officials who are familiar with its contents don’t see anything original or innovative in it. As one told The Wall Street Journal on Sept. 25, “I’m unimpressed, there’s not much new there.” From what we can grasp, the “victory plan” is less a “plan” and more a continuation of Zelensky’s lobbying campaign to keep U.S. arms flowing in perpetuity.  

Zelensky is dead-set on getting permission to use US and European long range missile systems against targets deep within Russia.  The problem, as Vladimir Putin rightly noted, is that these systems cannot hit such targets accurately without NATO satellite intel and acquisition.  Meaning, the missiles must be guided by US and European military technicians and assets.

It is likely that the majority of Ukrainian long range drone strikes within Russia are already being aided by NATO intel, but the use of ATACMS and Storm Shadow missiles far from Ukraine’s front line is another matter entirely.  There’s no plausible deniability for NATO involvement.  The use of these weapons within Russia would be akin to a declaration of war and would trigger escalation outside of Ukraine.

What would the consequences be?  Not necessarily the use of nuclear weapons (though Putin did just change his bottom line on a nuclear response to include long range attacks using NATO weapons), but the spread of more advanced Russian armaments to countries like China, Iran, Syria, North Korea, and even the Houthis in Yemen is a good bet.  Meaning a more significant threat to NATO interests in Asia and the Middle East.  The war would spread.

So far the Biden Administration has refrained from supporting the long range option, but has offered another $8 billion in support.  Under a Trump presidency, the money train is likely to stop abruptly.

Zelensky has offered no practical measures for negotiations, arguing that concessions are off the table.  Furthermore, he claims that peace is only possible once Ukraine has taken back all territory seized by Russia, including Crimea which was annexed in 2014.  He then demanded that Russia pay for Ukraine’s reconstruction and that Putin and a multitude of other Russian officials be handed over to be tried for war crimes.  This is never going to happen.

The core of Ukraine’s victory plan relies on long range strikes using NATO guided missiles and acceptance into NATO.  Both factors at this stage would cause WWIII.

Ukraine’s chest beating is the national equivalent of “short man’s syndrome.”  That said, Zelensky would not be making these kinds of demands if he was not being encouraged by someone behind the scenes.  Many officials within the US and Europe have given Zelensky delusions of grandeur about his chances, perhaps because they want the war to grind on forever.  These same officials have hinted consistently that they will not accept a Ukrainian loss.   

Regardless of what side people think should win, the fact is that Russia is the inevitable victor according to all the evidence on hand.  While the extent of Putin’s goals in the region are unknown, it’s unlikely that he intends to march beyond Ukraine.  He may simply stop at the edge of the Donbas and annex the region like he did Crimea.

This may actually be the best case scenario for all parties involved.  The longer the war goes on the greater the chances of a powerkeg moment and a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO.  Ukraine should not be talking about “victory”, that time has come and gone. They should be talking about peace.