Putin can't afford a long war in Ukraine

After 64 days of war in Ukraine, there is no sign that President Putin is prepared to concede the losses his Russian forces have suffered nor is there any evidence that he is faltering in his determination to achieve the objectives he set his military chiefs. However, the warning by Liz Truss, foreign secretary, this week that the war in Ukraine could last for at least five years or more appears questionable. What is the intelligence analysis behind this statement? And is the West prepared and sufficiently united to back Ukraine with military and economic aid for this length of time? Putin will be pondering the same questions. Looking at the war from the Kremlin point of view, there are good reasons to conclude that it’s in the interests of both Putin’s leadership survival and the future of Russia’s economy to grab a “victory” as quickly as possible and make the best of what has been a botched and incompetently-run invasion. A five-year campaign of attritional warfare in a part of Ukraine which has already suffered war since 2014 without a victory for Moscow makes little sense. The Russian armed forces are already running out of precision missiles, (each Kalibr cruise missile costs about $1.5 million), tank spares are low because of the western ban on the export to Russia of high-technology components and, most importantly, so many of the supposedly elite battalion tactical groups have been crippled by high casualty rates that Putin will be hard-pressed to fill the gaps with adequately- trained conscripts. General Philip Breedlove, former supreme allied commander Europe (Saceur), told The Times this week that he couldn’t see how Putin could contemplate a long war in Ukraine if only because of the manpower shortages. Leading US defence analyst and former senior Pentagon official Andrew Krepinivech agrees. “The betting is that Breedlove is right. If the war drags on Putin faces the risk of the Russian economy requiring years to recover, the military balance relative to Nato continuing to worsen, and growing internal discontent,” he said. “Putin has strong incentives to declare victory and end the war,” he said. “However, absent a ‘Munich sell-out’ by the West, the Ukrainians would almost certainly fight on. If so, a lot would depend on how much support Nato provides. If the alliance prioritises on not provoking Putin, the conflict could devolve into a low-level extended war,” he said. The Pentagon is also cautious about predicting a five-year war, even though the huge $33 billion military and economic package announced by President Biden this week would appear to indicate a pledge for the long haul. “We believe the war could be prolonged now that the focus has shifted to the east and south in terrain that both sides know well and in which the Russians can concentrate their forces,” John Kirby, Pentagon press secretary, told The Times. “But we wouldn’t be able to speculate as to how long exactly it may go. Our security assistance is designed primarily to help them in today’s fight. It would be wrong to conclude that the assistance in recent days or that to come reflect a certitude about the length of the war,” he said. “The truth is it can and should end today should Mr Putin choose to do the right thing and remove his forces,” Kirby said.