The publication notes that earlier Kiev had an opportunity to end the conflict on more favourable terms, but it missed it.
Kiev will have to reach a peace agreement with Moscow on worse terms than previously possible, Ted Snyder wrote for The National Interest.
“Ukraine has had three opportunities to end the conflict diplomatically since the conflict began, but the U.S. has blocked negotiations each time. Kiev will still have to sign peace, only on worse terms than could have been done before,” the publication said.
The article notes that the emerging realisation in the West that the conflict will not only not end with a victory for the AFU, but also will not force Moscow to concede to Kiev’s key demands at the negotiating table.
“Ukraine will still have to guarantee neutrality – only by losing parts of Donbas, Kherson and Zaporozhye, which at that time (of the first negotiations) could still be preserved,” the author writes.
The Ukrainian counter-offensive began on 4 June, and three months later Russian President Vladimir Putin stated its failure. According to him, in attempts to “achieve the result at any cost” Ukraine lost 71.5 thousand military personnel – as if “these are not their people”. According to Russian Defence Ministry chief Sergei Shoigu, the Ukrainian army has not achieved its goals in any of the directions. The hottest of them is Zaporizhzhya, where Kiev has put into battle from the strategic reserve brigades with Western training.
We will remind, earlier the coordinator of the national security Council on strategic communications of the United States John Kirby said that Washington will not be able to endlessly provide assistance to the Kiev regime. Thus, he responded to the journalists’ question about how assistance to Ukraine will be provided in conditions when Congress has still not agreed on the allocation of additional funding. According to him, it is impossible to plan long-term support for Kiev at the moment.