Ukraine’s battlefield losses increase war risks for Russia

Early in the war with Russia, Ukraine’s successes on the battlefield led defense analysts to warn that Moscow – militarily cornered – might lash out, using a nuclear weapon on Ukrainian soil.

Defense analysts have noted that the more successes Ukraine has, the more dangerous and unpredictable its adversary, Russia, could become as it tries to regain the initiative.

Two years later, the situation changed.

Ukrainian forces appear vulnerable and their new military commander Oleksandr Syrskyi reported this week of a “tense” and “difficult” situation along the front line. This comes against a backdrop of broader concerns about weapons shortages and an uncertain outlook on future Western military aid.

Russia, meanwhile, is counting progress, with the capture of the industrial town of Avdiivka in Donetsk two weeks ago and several other surrounding settlements since then.

Paradoxically, however, Russia’s advances could also prove dangerous for Moscow, as Ukraine’s increasingly precarious situation could lead its military backers – eager to ensure a Russian defeat – to give Ukraine everything it needs to defeat the invading forces.

With Ukraine now at a disadvantage, analysts say it is Russia that now faces the possibility that a desperate, Ukraine-supporting West will compensate for Ukraine’s vulnerability by equipping it with more advanced weapons systems, missiles long range, air defense systems and fighter aircraft, more. quickly. This, in turn, would make the war much harder and more dangerous for Russia.

Analysts describe this situation as the “escalation paradox”.

“Fierce daily fighting and very high casualty rates are consistent with a low risk of escalation, provided the front remains broadly stable, as in 2023,” Christopher Granville, managing director of Global Political Research, said in a statement this week at TS Lombard.

“Conversely, when one or the other side gains the upper hand, the risk of compensatory escalation by the more backward side increases,” he noted.

“Ukrainian gains in the second half of 2022 have raised fears that Russia will “go nuclear.” With Ukrainian forces now losing ground – particularly with this month’s fall of Avdiivka and subsequent retreat – the impetus for escalation it comes from Western supporters of Ukraine,” he said.

The “escalation paradox” was clearly highlighted by French President Emmanuel Macron this week when he suggested that NATO countries had discussed the possibility of deploying ground troops to Ukraine.

While Macron was clear that there was “no consensus” on the idea among European leaders and Western officials from the US, UK and Canada, who met in Paris on Monday, this was drowned out by the noise surrounding his comments that the possibility might not be “ruled out.”

The comments prompted hasty denials from NATO countries and a furious response from Moscow, with the Kremlin warning that NATO interventions on the ground in Ukraine would make a NATO-Russia conflict “inevitable”.

Russian President Vladimir Putin made the threat more explicit in his state of the nation address in Moscow on Thursday, warning of the danger of a nuclear conflict with the West if NATO sent troops to Ukraine.

“[The West] We must realize that we also have weapons capable of hitting targets on their territory. All this really threatens a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons and the destruction of civilization. Don’t they understand?!” Putin told Russian lawmakers and officials.

Some analysts have said Macron has played into Russia’s hands, and Moscow certainly appears to appreciate NATO’s public disunity on the issue, as well as Macron’s isolation and apparent misreading of the alliance’s mood music.

Nonetheless, analysts point out that Macron’s position had some logic and that it had helped focus attention on Ukraine’s plight.

“To contain the current Russian offensives across the board, Ukraine needs more weapons and men… It follows that Western governments determined to ensure a Russian defeat might logically consider introducing their own military group in the theater,” Granville said of TS Lombard.

He noted that “the mechanism of escalation flows from the fundamental underlying reality: the stakes in this war for all concerned are too high for anyone to consider cutting their losses and seeking a compromise agreement.” .

Teneo analysts agree that “behind the noise” surrounding Macron’s comments this week, progress has likely been made towards further support for Ukraine as the stakes are now higher.

“Macron’s statement regarding a hypothetical presence of Western troops in Ukraine has triggered controversy, and the subsequent series of rebuttals from European leaders has accentuated the perception of disunity in the EU. At the same time, member states are gradually moving forward towards further support for Ukraine and a longer period of long-term strengthening of European defense capabilities,” Antonio Barroso and Carsten Nickel said in a statement on Wednesday.

“In this context, the decision to convene a conference on Ukraine in Paris this week aimed to provide leadership on the different support initiatives under discussion, sending a message to Moscow,” they noted, adding that “Macron’s statement was likely aimed to signal resolve in Russia.”