Okay, here’s a breakdown of the key arguments and points made in the provided text, organized for clarity. I’ll cover the situation, the problems, the proposed options, and the author’s conclusion.
I. The Current situation: A Strained Defense
* Holding the Line, But Not Winning: Ukraine is currently managing to slow the Russian advance, but is far from capable of winning the war.This is achieved through immense cost and effort.
* Supply Issues & Corruption: The army is considerably under-supplied. Corruption, specifically mentioning Tymur Mindich and procurement issues, is diverting resources.
* Declining Morale & Increasing Desertion: The war has been ongoing for four years,leading to exhaustion,rising divorce rates,and collapsing morale. There’s a dramatic increase in cases of unauthorized absence (AWOL) and desertion. Numbers are provided:
* 255,000+ AWOL cases (since 2022)
* 56,000+ desertion cases (since 2022)
* 162,500 AWOL cases (first 10 months of 2025)
* 21,600 desertion cases (first 10 months of 2025)
* 21,000 troops left the army in October alone.
* Social Injustice: The war is exacerbating social inequalities.
* Demographic Crisis: Ukraine’s population has drastically declined (from 50 million to 31 million in Kyiv-controlled territory). Birth rates are below death rates, and fertility rates are very low (around one child per woman).
II.Strategic Options Presented
the author outlines three potential paths forward for Ukraine:
- Accept Putin’s Terms (Capitulation):
* Pros: Preserves a Ukrainian state (albeit a diminished one).
* Cons: Loss of political standing, territorial concessions, and long-term vulnerability.
- Radical Overhaul of Leadership & Military:
* Focus: Rebuilding mobilization,restructuring the command system,and fundamentally re-engineering the war effort.
* Rationale: Current institutions are inadequate for a prolonged war.
- Maintain the Status Quo:
* Strategy: Continue precision strikes on Russian oil infrastructure, hoping to cripple the Russian economy and wait for Putin’s death.
* Author’s Assessment: This is an illusion.Strikes won’t be enough to force Russia to stop, given the size disparity between the two countries.
III. The author’s Conclusion & Concerns
* Ukraine Has Chosen the status Quo: Zelenskyy and European partners appear to have committed to the third option (maintaining the status quo).
* Sustainability is doubtful: This approach is unsustainable due to:
* Morale & Exhaustion: Four years of war have taken a toll.
* Financial Crisis: A vast budget deficit and public debt exceeding 100% of GDP.
* Lack of European Support: Europe has failed to provide sufficient funding. Belgium hasn’t released frozen Russian assets, and economic growth in europe is weak.
* Unreliable US commitment: The EU cannot secure long-term commitments from the United States given the current political climate in Washington.
* urgent Need for Change: The author strongly argues that Ukraine must eventually choose the second option (radical restructuring) to survive.
* Worsening Terms: Delaying this change will result in harsher terms from Moscow. The Russian demands will likely expand beyond the current four regions to eight, with added demands for control mechanisms, demilitarization, and further concessions.
* Time is Running Out: Radical change is needed instantly before Ukraine’s options disappear and its ability to resist collapses.
In essence, the author paints a grim picture of Ukraine’s current situation, arguing that the current strategy is failing and that a drastic, painful overhaul of leadership and military structures is the only path to long-term survival, even if it means accepting unfavorable peace terms in the future.
