The White House Watch newsletter, offering insights into the implications of the 2024 US election for Washington and the global community, is now available for free access.
The article is authored by the director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin. Three years ago, when Vladimir Putin decided to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, it marked a pivotal event comparable to the impact of the 9/11 attacks. Despite the gradual build-up to this situation, the invasion was not unavoidable. However, once initiated, the conflict altered the trajectory of history. Western leaders now face a unique and formidable array of challenges, with managing relations with an unpredictable Russia being among the most significant.
As the conflict enters its fourth year, Ukraine remains largely afflicted, bearing the brunt of the chaos incited by the Kremlin. Russia, though affected to a lesser extent, still finds itself in a strategically disadvantageous position. Measured against the peaceful paths it might have pursued, the invasion of Ukraine has inadvertently introduced long-term security dilemmas for Russia. Such developments were unfathomable three years ago, whether regarding the near-impunity with which western missiles target Russian military sites, the occupation of Russian territory by a non-nuclear nation, the incorporation of Finland and Sweden into NATO, or the deterioration of Moscow’s valued relationship with Germany. Additionally, Putin has transformed Ukraine into a nation determined to avenge its grievances, equipped for conflict with those who once referred to them as “brothers.”
The situation represents a “strategic defeat” for Russia, as highlighted by former U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken following Russia’s failed offensive against Kyiv. However, by 2025, the circumstances have deteriorated more than the triumphant expectations initially held by the West. Despite considerable casualties and equipment losses, Russia has adapted to the challenges and continues to resist the beleaguered Ukrainian military. The Kremlin is already engaged in rebuilding its military capabilities, aiming to strengthen its forces by 2030.
While Western sanctions against Russia aimed to cripple its economy, the outcome was not as devastating as anticipated. Diverging from the Soviet Union’s model, Russia operates on market principles and is maintained by competent technocrats. As a major exporter of oil and other commodities, complete disconnection from global markets presents significant challenges. This, combined with strategic support from China and other non-Western nations, has resulted in a gradual implementation of sanctions, contributing to Russia’s ongoing resilience. Additionally, Russian society, which was already fragmented before the war, has been subdued through suppression, while the divided elites have united in support of Putin.
In a surprising turn of events, the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States has posed new implications. Trump seeks to conclude the war and reduce American involvement, a shift in trajectory that worsens an already declining situation ongoing since Ukraine’s unsuccessful 2023 counteroffensive. The Kremlin anticipates that Trump’s desire for a swift resolution might result in an agreement that halts hostilities but denies Ukraine credible security assurances, potentially leading to internal collapse, including polarizing presidential elections.
Regardless of the unpredictable diplomatic outcomes under Trump’s administration, it is evident that even if the war ends and U.S. sanctions are lifted, the current Russian regime will continue to perceive the West as a formidable adversary. Motivated by triumphalism, vindictiveness, and a desire to leave a significant mark on Russian history, and compounded by a lack of checks and balances in the Kremlin, Moscow may begin preparing for future conflicts while escalating its intimidation efforts against Europe.
Three years prior, Western capitals anticipated Kyiv’s rapid capture. However, a combination of Ukrainian resilience, Russian missteps, and Western support prevented this scenario from unfolding. Ukraine persists, Europe has taken steps to reduce reliance on Russian resources, and investments in deterrence have been established. Yet, by various other metrics, circumstances for Europeans are worse than they were in early 2022. Progress in enhancing the defense industrial base remains inconsistent. The post-COVID economic recovery has been hampered by the war’s effects, making increased defense spending untenable for many nations. Most significantly, the U.S., traditionally a cornerstone of European security, presents new risks under Trump’s leadership. Additionally, divisions within the EU and larger nations have intensified. While effective strategies like the Draghi report have been proposed, the political will to implement such solutions remains uncertain.
The West should address the issue of over-optimism concerning the prospects of defeating Putin and managing the challenge posed by Russia. Excessive expectations of outright victory, stemming from a lack of pragmatic assessment, have compounded the issue from the outset. It is crucial to engage in a calm, analytical discussion about mitigating the threats from Russia in the upcoming decade and how to prepare for potential eventualities.
