Is it time to admit that Trump overestimated his ability to bully Volodymyr Zelensky and charm Vladimir Putin into an agreement to end the war?
Why yes, yes it is. The goal is a good one: hundreds of thousands of people have died, untold treasure has been wasted for no gain on either side, and there is, as far as I can tell, no way to break the stalemate other than the collapse of one government or another, which seems unlikely.
I was a massive fan of the West's initial support for Ukraine's war effort. Putin expected an immediate capitulation, and when that failed to happen--a pleasant surprise--it made strategic sense to help Ukraine push Russia back to the lines it occupied before its 2020 offensive. It sent a good message to Russia, and to a lesser extent, other potential aggressors, and despite the deficiencies of Ukraine's government, it was clearly the victim in this case.
I think Putin's case for redrawing the map in eastern Ukraine is defensible, and border issues are not uncommon anywhere--ask India and Pakistan about that, or any of a number of other countries, and the region is more culturally Russian than Ukrainian. I also think Ukraine's case for keeping the current legal borders is defensible, but impractical. After more than a decade of war to regain the territory, it likely never will.
Russia's claim to Crimea is strong as well--it is the home port of the Russian Black Sea Fleet and has been Russian for centuries, and as importantly, Ukraine will never take it back. Give it up.
The war has been in a stalemate for two years--essentially returning to the status quo ante 2022.
So Trump is right--continuing the war is senseless for the combatants, and senseless for Ukraine's Western allies, whose strategic interests would be satisfied by a permanent cease-fire. Contra the claims made by European leaders and Biden, the Russian threat to NATO is modest and manageable--and would have been if Russia had replaced Zelensky with a puppet. That would be an unpleasant outcome, but hardly a threat.
UPDATED: Ukraine and Russia end their latest round of direct peace talks in Istanbul https://t.co/vz3fn6rOqW
β The Washington Times (@WashTimes) June 2, 2025
And yet...Trump clearly overestimated his ability to influence the outcome--both his ability to bully Zelensky into moderating his war aim to retake all the territory currently held by Russia, and to charm Putin into negotiating an end to the war in Ukraine.
πΊπ¦π·πΊ Negotiations between Ukraine and Russia have begun pic.twitter.com/8ifvBtdkAt
β Slava πΊπ¦ (@Heroiam_Slava) June 2, 2025
If anything, the war is escalating as the peace talks have dragged on. While this in itself is not highly unusual--countries always jockey for advantage to get the best deal--it's also pretty clear that neither country seems eager for the war to end. Rationally, they should be, but rationality in war is often in scarce supply.
BREAKING:
β VisegrΓ‘d 24 (@visegrad24) June 1, 2025
Ukraine launches the largest attack against the Russian Air Force of this war.
Drones smuggled into Russia have struck Russiaβs strategic bombers at airfields deep in Russia.
Up to 40 planes destroyed, including several A-50 (AEW&C) & Tu-95 & Tu-22 long-range bombers pic.twitter.com/jcShGzXU8l
In a massive--and I mean MASSIVE--escalation of the war, Ukraine successfully attacked up to 40 Russian strategic nuclear bombers deep--I mean really deep--in Russian territory. The plan was brilliant in plan and execution, and if the initial reports are true, then Russia just lost about a third of its irreplaceable airborne nuclear strike capability and its aura of near invulnerability on its territory.
Imagine a US adversary taking out a large portion--a third--of our strategic bomber fleet--B-52s and B-2 bombers (Russia has no equivalent of the B-2, of course, but these bombers serve the same function in more permissive environments). What would the US response be?
π₯πΊπ¦π·πΊ
β ππ§π§π πππππ | πͺπΊπ«π·π΅π±πΊπ¦ (@tweet4Anna_NAFO) June 1, 2025
Ukraine is conducting βa large scale special operation aimed at destroying enemy bomber aircraft.β β SBU
π― Belaya, Diaghilevo, Olenya & Ivanovo & Voskresensk airfields.
πΉπBelaya, the head of the SBU, Lieutenant Gal Vasyl Malyuk, commenting on the "BAVOVNA".
2/24 pic.twitter.com/3TRFK6P4ml
π₯πΊπ¦π·πΊ
β ππ§π§π πππππ | πͺπΊπ«π·π΅π±πΊπ¦ (@tweet4Anna_NAFO) June 1, 2025
First drone attack on Siberia: video of the strike appears
This may indicate a new stage in the deep damage to the territory of the Russian Federation and the increasing vulnerability of its rear regions.
4/24 pic.twitter.com/b23xMzStlO
Anybody who understands such things should be in awe at Ukraine's ingenuity and ability to strike anywhere in Russia--including all the way across the Asian continent. It may only have weapons that reach a bit over 100 miles, but it can strike at the heart of Russia's military thousands of miles away.
π₯πΊπ¦π·πΊ
β ππ§π§π πππππ | πͺπΊπ«π·π΅π±πΊπ¦ (@tweet4Anna_NAFO) June 1, 2025
An urgent meeting is reportedly underway in the Kremlin.
Putin is also calling a meeting of the gov & the Security Council next week. Topic: internal security & the protection of strategic infrastructure in the face of strikes on facilities deep in the rear.
6/24 pic.twitter.com/sRTkDapGZQ
This is an Israeli level of military and intelligence prowess, especially since all indications are that the United States was not even aware of the operation. Just stunning.
But also very dangerous for Ukraine and the world. Taking out a nuclear power's strategic capability is very destabilizing, even though Russia's ability to reach out and touch somebody other than the United States is not really significantly degraded. Nuclear capability plays a minor role in actual military capability short of actual nuclear war, but an outsized role in the prestige and deterrent capacity of a nuclear power.
Russia is a major power solely due to its nuclear capability. Without it, they are second-tier. They are threatening enough, but hardly an unstoppable force. Sort of a supersized pre-Desert Storm Iraq.
"If needed, a nuclear attack will also be launched on Ukraine." pic.twitter.com/N3ttd2Dj3s
β Russia Army (@RussiaStanArmed) June 2, 2025
If anything, Putin's position will be hardened by this attack, suggesting that it will turn out to be a massive tactical victory and a strategic failure. All those comparisons to Pearl Harbor you see on X could turn out to be more apt than people know. Russia may decide that the Ukraine war has just become an existential battle, just as the United States did in 1941.
BANNON: When you achieve escalation in a situation like the Russia-Ukraine conflict, they turn into wars of annihilation.
β Bannonβs WarRoom (@Bannons_WarRoom) June 2, 2025
We are headed towards a dark place.
And fast. pic.twitter.com/zFvVosaV3L
If Russia's military was something of a paper tiger before--and I have argued that it has been--it need not remain so if Putin decides that the war is existential. His strategy up to now is to bleed Ukraine into submission, without full mobilization or devoting his economy to the war effort.
That could change, and suddenly Russia COULD become a real threat to NATO countries in a way it hasn't been for decades. Putin is unlikely to allow Russia's prestige to take yesterday's blow without a serious escalation--probably unlike anything we have seen up to now.
I hope that isn't the case, of course. But Ukraine didn't inflict a tactical defeat on Russia on the actual battlefield. For the first time, they have shifted the strategic balance of power. That, I believe, will be intolerable.
What does that mean? Trump's strategy has failed. I wish it weren't so, but what else can you conclude? A tragic but limited war may have just turned into an existential battle, and Russia's military becomes fearsome when the state is threatened. It may be horrible at wars of conquest, but it becomes deadly in wars like this one just became.
