Talk of the yet-to-begin peace negotiations and Ukraine's post-war future is becoming increasingly frequent. Peace talks, even if they are expected to begin in the coming months, do not inherently signify progress in a positive direction as long as military action continues and escalates, and Russia refuses to alter its political objectives in the slightest.

The content and outcome of these negotiations, which will shape Ukraine's future, depend primarily on what happens on the battlefield. Serial aggressor Russia is clearly focused on grabbing ever more foreign land at any cost, as well as psychologically, militarily and economically weakening Ukraine, rather than committing to peace.

Russia operates under the belief that it will not ultimately have to relinquish occupied territories, hoping even to seize additional land. As for the small area captured by Ukraine in Russia's Kursk Oblast, Moscow assumes it will inevitably be "returned."

It is rather difficult to imagine – unless Ukraine and the West decisively seize the initiative – that Vladimir Putin's Russia would agree to Ukraine's inevitable path toward membership in the European Union and NATO or withdraw to internationally recognized borders or even the de facto borders from early 2022. As for taking responsibility for war crimes committed and the damage caused, that seems entirely out of the question. The serial aggressor continues to demand the capitulation of both Ukraine and the Western nations supporting it. Russia believes it holds the reins, and that time is working more in its favor than in that of Ukraine or the West.

Why? Because the West is currently politically weak. There is still some time before Donald Trump might assume office as president of the United States, and his stance and plans regarding Ukraine and Russia remain far from clear. Meanwhile, major EU countries like Germany and France are entangled in domestic political turbulence. The domino effect of "Orbanization" in Southeast and Central Europe and the Caucasus is gaining momentum – with not just Hungary, but also Slovakia, Georgia and perhaps even Romania moving in that direction. Serbia, of course, is already there. In Bulgaria, pro-Russian sentiment has been strong for quite some time.

Russia feels – hopefully as mere wishful thinking – that the West is crumbling, weakening and will ultimately surrender.

Ceasefire and negotiations must not be rushed

Ukraine is indeed in a very difficult position, and Russia strives to worsen it every day with unprecedented missile and drone attacks, as well as human wave offensives along the entire front line. Yet, Russia is not in much better shape either, though its physical suffering – such as burning oil depots – remains far less severe. Putin is a gambler playing Russian roulette with his country's economy and future, deepening Russia's unbearable dependence on China. He is going all in, taking incredible risks that the West would hardly consider unless Russia directly attacks NATO.

The winner will likely be the side that endures longer, both psychologically and in terms of resources. While the financial and technological resources of the Western world are significantly greater, its psychological resilience is noticeably weaker. Otherwise, the West would already have mobilized itself and set its defense industry machinery into full motion. Such a move would deter Russia far more effectively than merely allowing Ukraine to conduct long-range strikes and would force it to seek peace. Unfortunately, this has not yet happened, leaving Russia unmotivated to seriously consider ending its senseless and barbaric aggression.

Given the opposing sides' completely contradictory positions, and the fact that aggressor Russia – having started the war – must also be the one to end it, no genuine desire for peace is evident beyond empty rhetoric from the Kremlin. Therefore, rushing into peace talks should be avoided. First, Russia itself must make a peace initiative that can be taken somewhat seriously. Second, Russia will likely only do this if it visibly loses the initiative and realizes that time is working against it and that it is bound to lose in the end.

For this reason, the West must fully activate its defense industry and provide Ukraine with significantly larger-scale military aid. This aid must especially include capabilities that allow Ukraine to target Russian military and economic assets across all of European Russia. Russia must finally start feeling what Ukraine has endured for nearly three years. Bringing the war to Russian territory through massive, precise and devastating long-range strikes is the only way to put an end to terror.

NATO member states must simultaneously return to Cold War-era thinking and collective defense planning, requiring each ally to allocate approximately 4 percent of GDP to defense – not just the border states with a shared frontier with Russia. Only then will Russia understand that it cannot achieve its imperialist ambitions in Ukraine and that embarking on a new military adventure against NATO would be a suicidal endeavor.

To borrow the words of the bloody dictator Putin, albeit in reverse: Russia must be forced into peace. It cannot be enticed into peace through diplomatic maneuvers, phone calls, conferences or concessions. This is a realization reached at nearly every security forum in the West, but practical actions have yet to align with these understandings and political declarations.

Ukraine's future only secure under the nuclear umbrella

Ukraine's NATO membership, unfortunately, is not yet a certainty, despite the wording of the previous NATO summit about an "irreversible" path to the alliance. On the other hand, it should be entirely clear that deterring Russia – which means preventing a new post-(ceasefire) aggression against Ukraine – is only possible with the protection of a nuclear umbrella over Ukraine. Whether Ukraine becomes a NATO member or not. Attacking a country without such a nuclear umbrella is far less risky and far more tempting, as evidenced by Russia's aggressions against Georgia and Ukraine but not against the Baltic countries or Poland.

NATO membership effectively extends the nuclear umbrella of the United States, as well as that of the United Kingdom and France, to Ukrainian territory – to the extent that Ukraine controls it sovereignly. This is the primary sticking point regarding Ukraine's NATO membership, as the no matter how remote prospect of nuclear war weighs heavily on certain nations.

What (future) borders of Ukraine are we even discussing? What will be the status of occupied territories if Russia does not withdraw to the borders of December 1991? Wouldn't this set the stage for a new military conflict, even though NATO (including Ukraine) would, of course, never initiate a war of conquest? Would Ukraine's membership in the alliance mean that the Cold War with Russia and high defense spending in the West will persist indefinitely? These are just a few of the critical questions currently without answers.

Ukraine is often offered the temporary substitute of hosting European allied forces instead of NATO membership, but this unfortunately does not provide the equivalent of a nuclear umbrella. First, Ukraine itself already has several hundred thousand battle-hardened soldiers, which no European country is capable of matching. How large a force would be needed to make Russia reconsider its actions? Tens of thousands, possibly entire divisions? Where would such forces even come from?

Another option, which for now remains largely theoretical, is Ukraine's acquisition of nuclear weapons. This is something neither Western allies nor Russia desire, as it would contradict efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation, including with regard to Iran. The train of Stalinist North Korea, sadly, left the station years ago.

Finally

Discussions about the possibility of negotiations with the aggressor and the key issues surrounding Ukraine's future are nevertheless valuable, despite the almost total uncertainty. These discussions help clarify what Ukraine and its Western allies must do to achieve their desired goals.

Putin's Russia will inevitably declare its own "victory" through propaganda, unless Russia itself collapses. The victory for Ukraine and the democratic world will come when Russia is forced to end its military actions, peace is sustained and Ukraine steadily becomes a member of both the European Union and NATO – under a nuclear umbrella and within borders reclaimed through territorial liberation and negotiations. It is unlikely that Moscow will genuinely see annexing a few oblasts as a victory if the vast majority of Ukraine becomes independent of Moscow and anchored in the West, with functional nuclear guarantees.

This does not, of course, rule out the Kremlin's worst-case scenario: that Russia collapses before a ceasefire or a negotiated settlement is reached, as Putin stubbornly counted on the breaking of Ukraine and the West.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!