The question of whether Ukraine can actually defeat Russia has moved from the realm of quiet strategic debate to a more urgent, public discussion. Prompted in part by recent comments from former President Donald Trump suggesting Ukraine could regain its territory, policymakers and analysts are increasingly confronting a long-avoided question: what happens if Russia loses? For four years, the United States and its allies have provided roughly $66.9 billion in military assistance to Ukraine, as of January 2025, according to the State Department, enough to prevent collapse but deliberately calibrated to avoid a decisive Ukrainian victory. This cautious approach stems from a deep-seated fear that a humiliated Russia could become even more dangerous, and unpredictable.
This fear isn’t fresh. Throughout decades of Cold War maneuvering and post-Soviet engagement, Washington has often prioritized stability over decisive outcomes when dealing with Moscow. In 1991, President George H.W. Bush cautioned Ukraine against what he termed “suicidal nationalism” as the Soviet Union dissolved, a warning reflecting concerns about regional instability. Similarly, the Obama administration in 2014 declined to provide lethal aid, citing fears of escalating the conflict following Russia’s annexation of Crimea, as documented in congressional records. Even today, some argue that providing Ukraine with the weaponry needed for a clear victory risks “cornering” Vladimir Putin, potentially leading to unforeseen consequences.
Escalation is Already a Reality
However, the argument that avoiding a Russian defeat prevents escalation is increasingly untenable. Russia has already dramatically escalated the conflict, launching the largest land war in Europe since World War II, systematically targeting Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure, and repeatedly issuing veiled nuclear threats. Recent data reveals the scale of this escalation: between December and February, Russian forces launched over 14,760 guided aerial bombs, 738 missiles, and nearly 19,000 strike drones at Ukraine, according to Ukrainian military officials. Refusing to allow Ukraine to win, doesn’t prevent escalation; it prolongs aggression and emboldens the Russian war machine.
Many analysts now believe the conflict is driven less by rational calculation and more by the psychological state of Vladimir Putin. The prevailing view is that Putin will not cease hostilities simply because of economic hardship or battlefield losses. He appears driven by a belief that no one will effectively challenge his ambitions, and will continue the war as long as he believes he can sustain it, regardless of the cost in lives or resources.
A Historical Perspective: The Fall of the Soviet Union
The fear of a weakened Russia destabilizing the international order echoes Cold War anxieties. However, history suggests a different outcome. The Soviet Union didn’t collapse due to a policy of cautious engagement, but because its economic and political system proved unable to compete with the West. The “peace through strength” approach championed by President Ronald Reagan, which involved a significant military buildup and a firm stance against Soviet expansionism, is often cited as a contributing factor to the Soviet Union’s eventual demise.
Today, Russia is facing mounting losses on the battlefield. Independent Western estimates, including those from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), place Russian casualties at over one million killed, wounded, or missing since the start of the full-scale invasion in 2022. More recently, reports from February 2026 indicate that Russian forces are sustaining approximately 30,000 to 35,000 “irreversible losses” – killed or severely wounded – per month, exceeding their monthly recruitment rate for the first time, according to The Moscow Times.
Ukraine’s Growing Capabilities and Shifting Dynamics
As Russia’s objectives shrink, Ukraine’s defensive capabilities are demonstrably growing. Recruitment for Russian forces has become increasingly difficult and costly, while equipment losses continue to mount. Sanctions imposed by Western nations are constraining Russia’s long-term industrial capacity, and its budget deficits are widening, with energy revenues proving volatile. Despite repeated offensives, Russia has failed to achieve its initial strategic goals: subduing Kyiv, fracturing NATO, or breaking Ukrainian resistance.
A telling sign of the shifting dynamics is the recent appeal from President Trump to President Zelenskyy for assistance in protecting against Iranian Shahed drones in the Middle East, as reported by the BBC. This request underscores Ukraine’s rapidly developing expertise in countering drone attacks. In just a few years, Ukraine has become a leading laboratory for modern warfare, possessing a depth of practical knowledge – particularly in drone technology and aerial defense – that few other nations can match.
Even Moscow’s attempts to cripple Ukraine’s energy system during the recent winter, a strategy intended to cause a humanitarian catastrophe and destabilize the country, ultimately failed to achieve its objectives. Instead, the war has had the opposite effect: NATO is larger and more unified, European defense spending is increasing, and Russia is becoming increasingly reliant on countries like Iran, North Korea, and China.
The Path Forward: Embracing Victory
The primary obstacle in Washington is not a lack of military feasibility, but a lingering fear of the consequences of a Russian defeat. However, the greater danger lies in fearing victory more than aggression. Allowing Russia to continue its war of attrition only prolongs the suffering and increases the risk of further escalation. A decisive Ukrainian victory, while carrying its own risks, offers the best path towards a lasting peace and a more stable European security order.
The situation demands a reassessment of long-held assumptions about Russia and a willingness to embrace a strategy that prioritizes Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity. The next key development to watch will be the outcome of ongoing discussions within the U.S. Congress regarding further military aid packages for Ukraine, as well as the continued implementation of sanctions against Russia. The future of the conflict, and the broader geopolitical landscape, hinges on these decisions.
What are your thoughts on the evolving situation in Ukraine? Share your perspectives and join the conversation below.
Related reading
