According to an article in the New York Times, last week was the worst week for Russian President Vladimir Putin since he invaded Ukraine seven months ago in a decision that lacked wisdom, justice, mercy and no Plan B.
Veteran journalist Thomas Friedman opened his article by examining the setbacks Russia suffered last week on the military, diplomatic and even domestic levels.
The author summarized what the Russians suffered, saying that Ukraine and its allies had recently forced Russian aggressors into a disorderly retreat from large swathes of territory, and that the leaders of China and India had expressed displeasure with their ally Putin. The war and the resulting inflation in food and energy that harmed their countries’ population of 2.7 billion, in addition, a Russian pop star announced to his 3.4 million followers on Instagram that the war had “turned our country into a hideous country.” “The lives of our citizens are deteriorating.”
Instead, according to Friedman, the discontent has reached Russia’s European allies, who emphasizes that in many of his conversations with these allies he has learned that they are also concerned, and despite these developments, the author says This question has been raised since the beginning of the 20th century. This is the war: How does this war end in balance? And is it fixed?
Here, Friedman says that he still doesn’t know the definitive answer to this, but notes that during his search for the answer, he realized that there are “3 possible outcomes, some completely new, some familiar, but all related. are. Complex and unexpected side effects:
First: for Ukraine to win outright, which, according to Friedman, might drive Putin to do something crazy when he sees himself directly humiliated and defeated.
He continued: But Friedman emphasized that no one expects the Ukrainian army to be able to follow up the significant military gains it has made over the past two weeks by driving out the remaining forces from the areas where they are stationed. Friedman warns that Putin may resort to nuclear weapons, which are often waved at him.
Second, making a “dirty deal” with Putin that guarantees a ceasefire and halts the destruction, but risks dividing Western allies and angering many Ukrainians. The author here made it clear that he could not imagine Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky accepting a deal. “A ceasefire or something close to it. His forces are now gaining momentum and he is committed to retaking every bit of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea.”
Third: Making a “less dirty deal” where everything goes back to before Putin invaded Ukraine last February, and Friedman believes Kyiv might be willing to live with it, and maybe even the Russian people. However, Friedman believes that such an agreement may not be possible unless Putin is toppled first, because he cannot face the undeniable reality of his war, which was “absurd” in every sense of the word.
After considering these possible outcomes, Friedman explained that the contrast between the three possibilities was profound, pointing out that whatever the outcome, most of us would still be affected by the war. But the war in Ukraine will take care of you, the price of energy and food and most importantly. This is your humanity.”
Friedman concluded his article by saying that this war could end in many ways, some better than others and some worse, but none of them would be easy. the writer.
Source: Lebanon Debate
