Did Ukraine Win the War in March 2022?
Davyd Arakhamia is the leader of Zelensky’s party in the Ukrainian parliament and was among the delegation that took part in negotiations with Russia last year. In a recent interview with Ukrainian journalist Nataliia Moseichuk, he became the sixth public figure to confirm that the West opposed a peace deal at the time.
“When we returned from Istanbul,” he states, “Boris Johnson came to Kyiv and said that we will not sign anything with them at all, let’s just fight”. Arakhamia also says that “the goal of the Russian delegation” was to “pressure us into signing agreements so that we would accept neutrality”.
“This was the biggest thing for them,” he continues. “They were ready to end the war if we take neutrality … and give a commitment that we will not join NATO … The key point was this. Everything else is cosmetic, political seasonings like denazification, Russian-speaking population blah blah blah”.
As to why Ukraine did not agree to Russia’s demands, Arakhamia mentions two other factors aside from Boris Johnson’s visit: Ukraine’s constitution would have to be changed; and there was a concern that Russia might try to invade again.
Hence it can’t be inferred that Ukraine definitely would have signed the agreement but for the West’s refusal. For example, if Johnson had told the Ukrainians that the West will support whatever decision they take, they still might have opted not to sign the agreement. Of course, if he had encouraged or pressured them to sign it, they almost certainly would have done so.
Arakhamia’s remarks come amidst coverage that is increasingly gloomy about Ukraine’s prospects for total victory.
NBC News reports that “U.S. and European officials have begun quietly talking to the Ukrainian government about what possible peace negotiations with Russia might entail”, including “what Ukraine might need to give up to reach a deal”. (Though Zelensky disputed the report, claiming that “nobody puts pressure on us”.)
Writing in the Wall Street Journal, two fellows from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (a thinktank in Washington) argue that Western leaders have “indulged all too often in magical thinking” and “there should be no illusions that any possible combination of short-term steps will be sufficient to force Putin to abandon his war”.
Writing in Foreign Affairs, two fellows from the Council on Foreign Relations (another D.C. thinktank) argue that “that Ukraine and the West are on an unsustainable trajectory, one characterized by a glaring mismatch between ends and the available means”. They call for “a comprehensive reappraisal of the current strategy”.
And Konstantin Kisin, who describes himself as “someone who has been a vocal supporter of Ukraine’s fight for its sovereignty since the day it was invaded”, argues that “the time has come to end the war”. (I had a friendly debate with Kisin over Substack in September/October of last year, where I took the more dovish position.)
One of the points Kisin makes in his recent article is that “Ukraine has achieved what almost no one could have predicted when Putin first invaded”. Which is consistent with what historian Anatol Lieven has been saying since mid-March 2022, namely that Ukraine has in a sense “already won”. They successfully defended their capital, thereby retaining their independence and forcing the Russians to regroup for a more limited war in the East.
One of Western leaders’ key failings, Lieven notes, was not emphasising the scale of Ukraine’s early victory in their rhetoric. With a few exceptions, they’ve insisted that victory means liberating all of Ukraine’s territory. If, instead, they’d come out in April 2022 and trumpeted that ‘Ukraine has won the battle for its independence’, it would have been much easier to sell a peace deal to both Ukrainians and Westerners.
But the window for doing that has long since closed. Unless Ukraine regains the upper hand in the current war of attrition, any peace deal they sign will be tilted even more heavily toward Russian interests.
Stop Press: Vladimir Medinsky, who was among the Russian delegation that took part in negotiations with Ukraine last year, has claimed that “the conclusion of a peace treaty … was disrupted after a visit to Kiev not only by Boris Johnson, but also by representatives of the American State Department and the Pentagon”.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The west willed Ukraine to win but denied the means. While the munitions we supplied have enable Ukraine to give Russia a bloody nose, regain territory and then hold the line, it was always too late for a Ukrainian break through.
shame on us.
I think the only bloody noses you will find despite the Wests wonder-weapons, belong to the 400 000 Ukraine troops who died trying to breach three echelons of robust Russian defensive lines – and not getting past the first, designed to draw Ukrainian infantry forces into a killing zone through dense mine fields rendering that whizz-bang ‘modern’ Western armour of little use as support and sitting ducks for Russian drones and helicopter attack.
Shame on our Government for engaging in Uncle Sam’s evil regime change proxy war mischiefs.
Ukraine ‘won’ every three days according to those Western Govt mouthpieces ‘the media’ back in 2022.
In reality. Russia won when it successfully invaded and annexed Crimea in 2014, and got away with it during the reign of the Sainted One,The Effete, His Supremeness, Barry bin Obama.
Putin had to sit out Trump’s Presidency until another dope got into the White House before completing the mission – annexe the Donbas – and along came Joe 10% Big Guy. Bingo!
Russia has what it wants land wise, politically it wants Ukraine neutrality.
That’s the peace deal right there. Ukraine/The West has nothing left with which to negotiate. They gambled big; they lost big. Time to pay the debt before Ukraine runs out of people.
Anyway, there’s a new front in the Everwar to divert attention, enrich the arms manufacturers, grease palms in US Congress.
Good post, totally agree. Every week we were told that the Ukes would be in Moscow within weeks.
Ukes lost the war in 2022. The Russian feint to Keeev was just that. They took most of the Russianised areas that they desired bar Kharkov and Odessa – prob eat those up later. The Ukes have prob lost 600 K dead and injured. It was over last year.
Ukeland is just a US state and in the main a money laundering, bio lab centre and a future launch pad for the inevitable US attack on Russia. That is all it is.
Russia could take Kiev within a few weeks if it wanted to.
Russia deliberately ignores territorial gains for a war of attrition.
Putin is mindful to keep civilian casualties to a minimum as he respects the welfare of Russia’s Slavic brothers and sisters.
Putin also keeps Russian casualties to a minimum.
Russia are using “rope-a-dope” tactics to deplete Ukraine of fighting men and Nato equipment so that Russia can go on the counter offensive once Ukraine have little resistance to offer after their failed “counteroffensive”.
A Russian advance to the Dnieper River, a land bridge to Transnistria or all the way to the Polish border is a distinct possibility to achieve the stated goals of the SMO and complete subjugation of ultranationalist Ukraine.
Russia would prefer a diplomatic solution but the West cannot be trusted.
Absolutely true.
And the longer this goes on the more territory Russia will hold thus giving them a bigger hand at the inevitable negotiating table.
And they said that 18 months ago. But no, the West/Nato blunders on.
So dreadfully sad that so many will have died, families shattered.
I really don’t know who is more evil, Blair or Johnson.
Let the devil decide.
(Mind you he’s going to have his work cut out dealing with those resposible for the continuing Palestinian genocide)
Just thought I’d throw that in for the downticks.
I am sure the Poles will eventually oblige by pushing the border to the East to repossess Lviv/Lvov/Lemberg.
Thousands of young Ukrainian men have been sacrificed on the altar of Western/NATO hubris. The words of Lord Farquaad in Shrek spring to mind, “Some of you may die, but it’s a sacrifice I am willing to make”. As in WW1, the brightest and the best have been fed into the meat-grinder for the petty ambitions of inferior men.
The Russian Federation wants a land corridor to Moldova as part of its revanchist aim to dominate Eastern Europe and create a buffer zone against NATO. We know this because Russia has told us that. November 2020 FSB strategic objective in Moldova: ‘The full restoration of the strategic partnership between Moldova and the Russian Federation’ FSB Outline of Operational Aims and Means, 21 November 2021 Of course Ukraine did not win in 2022, nor did they lose in 2014. This war has its roots far back in time, certainly to 1917 but even further than that to the ninth century. Ukraine cannot lose because, just like the Kurds, Chechens, Cossacks and so many others, their nationalism runs deep, 92.3% voting for independence, majorities in all regions. Consequently, very much like an irresistible force meeting an immovable object, this conflict is set to continue for some time, may never end, tectonic plates ever shifting. There may be negotiations, even a treaty but each side takes the soviet view that treaties are only useful while they serve an expedient purpose and then open hostilities will resume. How does this end? It doesn’t unless the West gives Ukraine the wherewithal to regain all… Read more »
Which comic did you get that from?
The reference is there for all to read.
But I see no useful or even interesting referenced contribution from you.
All right, I will rephrase my question. What leads you to believe that the FSB has primacy over the rest of Russian policy-making arms, especially since the security service is famed for its disinformation and propaganda skills.
As for referenced contributions, I tend to listen to what Putin says directly (as closely as I can, not being a Russian linguist and not trusting many Western translations).
Putin is entitled to his opinion.
Most on here have their own.
I think in his position he is entitled to a bit more than just an opinion, do get back into the real world. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion on anything. It doesn’t make them right, not even if the majority share it.
You think Putin lives in the real world?
What exactly is his position, on anything, except self serving?
Everyone is most certainly not entitled to their own opinions in Putin’s Russia.
If he doesn’t like their opinion, he poisons their underpants…..
You come across as unhinged.
The last refuge of the bigot…….and the incorrigibly dim……. ‘Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny on Monday released a recording of a phone call he said he made to an alleged state security operative, who revealed some details of how the politician was supposedly poisoned and media identified as a member of a team that has reportedly trailed Navalny for years. The man in the recording indicated that he was involved in cleaning up Navalny’s clothes “so that there wouldn’t be any traces” after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s top critic fell into a coma while on a domestic flight over Siberia. During the recorded call, the man said that if the plane hadn’t made an emergency landing, “the situation would have turned out differently.” The man, who was named in a news report last week as an operative from Russia’s FSB domestic security agency, pointed to Navalny’s underwear as a place where the substance that poisoned the politician may have been planted.’ ‘Navalny, who is convalescing in Germany, said the report proved beyond doubt that FSB operatives tried to kill him on Putin’s orders. On Monday, he posted a video on his YouTube channel Monday titled “I called my killer. He… Read more »
Oddly I agree with most of what you say here.
This point however is delusional
“How does this end? It doesn’t unless the West gives Ukraine the wherewithal to regain all of its pre 2014 territories and then rebuilds Ukraine and its defence forces as a bulwark against Russian expansionism.”
These territories, much like your accurate claim of fierce Ukrainian nationalism will never be controlled by Ukrainians again. They are ethnically Russian and know what Ukrainian rule did to them since 2014. Short of Nazis ethnically cleansing, there will be no return of these lands.
More reading required: Eleanor Knott conducted fieldwork into issues of identity and citizenship in Crimea before annexation. Her conclusions are based on qualitative fieldwork conducted in Crimea prior to annexation. This data, collected during a time of calm, questions what is actually known about the varying identities and preferences of Crimea’s residents, at a time when annexation was inconceivable. ‘When Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014, many pitched annexation as if it was a desirable outcome for Crimea’s residents. After all, weren’t most of Crimea’s residents not only ethnically Russian but also pro-Russian? Weren’t they already Russian citizens?’ ‘My research shows that identity in Crimea was far more complex than a region with a Russian, or pro-Russian, majority. Few in Crimea identified as pro-Russian nationalists. In fact, only those I interviewed within pro-Russian parties and movements identified as such. Instead, many identified as ethnically Russian, but with few cultural or political ties to Russia. Many others identified as between Ukraine and Russia: as Crimean. Meanwhile, many younger people did not identify, ethnically, even as Russian speakers, rather they identified as Ukrainian citizens.’ ‘We know we had underestimated the strength of people’s political identification with Ukraine before Russia’s war against Ukraine. Equally, we underestimated… Read more »
“…Ukraine has in a sense “already won” … they successfully defended their capital, thereby retaining their independence and forcing the Russians to regroup for a more limited war in the East.”
This is a typically common Western misreading of Russian strategy, which is primarily to de-militarise the country. I doubt Russia is particularly interested in taking Kyiv. Rather, they want a buffer state between themselves and NATO – they’ve said it often enough. Tragically, several hundred thousand men have died because of this wanton misreading and the apparent delight of the U.S. in going to war.
There is only one thing that the Russians have done wrong in this conflict, and that was to react to the provocation of Biden and his Neocon chums in the weeks before border incursion and the Ukrainian troop build-up threatening Donbas.
What proportion of Ukrainian men in the age rage 17-35 have been killed or mutilated?
What proportion of Russian men in the same age range have suffered the same damage?
Lazy comment. Do some research…….