Russia and Europe’s Dangerous Saber-Rattling: From Despair of Peace Toward All-Out War
Four years into the enigmatic conflict in Ukraine movements on the battlefield geography and in the soft power and narrative-building sphere have intensified. President Putin with his specific authoritarian management and sagacity has succeeded in these years in achieving his outlined objectives regarding several fundamental challenges—including managing the economy the Prigozhin rebellion and maintaining war-centric political and social stability.
Four years into the enigmatic conflict in Ukraine, movements on the battlefield geography and in the soft power and narrative-building sphere have intensified. President Putin, with his specific, authoritarian management and sagacity, has succeeded in these years in achieving his outlined objectives regarding several fundamental challenges—including managing the economy, the Prigozhin rebellion, and maintaining war-centric political and social stability.
For the continuation of Russian leadership, he has secured his country's public opinion while engaging in a test of strength with the entirety of the Euro-Atlantic bloc until 2030. On one hand, his army has achieved success by occupying several cities and villages. On the other hand, Ukraine has succeeded in several naval, drone, and aerial operations, destroying fuel depots, petrochemical complexes, and downing several advanced Russian fighter jets. Simultaneously, the soft war between the two sides continues using various media methods and leveraging regional and international forums. Although the fate of the war will not ultimately be decided on the front line, three possibilities currently lie ahead, each carrying a spectrum of potential consequences: a Russian advance, Ukrainian success, or a form of stalemate along the current military lines.
While threats from the NATO and Western axis against Russia have intensified to an unprecedented level, Mr. Putin, at the annual Sochi meeting, announced his country's continued readiness and will to confront the Ukrainian army, which enjoys full-scale Western support. He warned Western leaders that Russia will never be the losing side in this war. The important point is that all wars begin with excessive optimism, but as conflicts become attritional, the parties, in choosing between "bad" and "worse," invariably select "worse."
This is because, at this stage, the primary decision-making role falls to the military, which fundamentally envisions the end of any war only in its own victory. Currently, with a near-doubling of Russian troop numbers and entrenchment on shorter front lines supported by extensive artillery, defeating the Ukrainian army will be a major challenge. However, the Ukrainians have surprised the world so much since the invasion began that they cannot be easily considered defeated. Therefore, it seems this devastating war will ultimately end with some form of high-level compromise, most likely between the Kremlin and the White House, and at the expense of certain third parties.
Meanwhile, in Moscow, Vladimir Putin has signed the budget for the coming years, which includes the largest recorded increase in military spending. Defense spending in 2024 increased by over 70% compared to 2023, accounting for 40% of the total budget and 10% of the GDP. This defense budget may seem unrealistic, given that revenues are projected at 22.5% higher than this year, which is only possible if oil prices increase. On the other hand, these are only the overt budget figures. In reality, Russia's budget has a classified section that is also allocated for defense but does not appear anywhere for war-related reasons. Defense experts estimate the Russian army's daily expenditure at one billion dollars. Putin has also managed to reduce social spending, convinced that the decisive majority of Russians want to make sacrifices for the country. Therefore, it is obvious that if financial and military aid to Ukraine does not arrive, or arrives too late, and the Russians have vast additional sums to mobilize new soldiers and equip the army, only one outcome is possible: Ukraine loses the war, and Russia will reach NATO's borders. As an expert from the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) stated, Moscow is preparing "to win the war in Ukraine and for a permanent war with the West."
It is undeniable that only a sustainable ceasefire can end the ongoing human catastrophe—with over one million killed and wounded from both sides and over a trillion dollars in infrastructure damage—and allow Kyiv and its partners to begin the long and extremely costly process of rebuilding Ukraine's economy. This would reinforce Kyiv's hopes of joining the European Union, a prospect that might also appeal to some pragmatic Ukrainians, who believe a ceasefire and economic growth would allow Ukraine to strengthen its armed forces.
The grimmer reality is that both the Ukrainian and Russian economies have suffered the most damage from this destructive war. Ukraine's economy has shrunk to one-third of its size, and Russia's economy has also experienced at least a 10% reduction. Meanwhile, despite more than 20,000 international sanctions, Russia endures serious damage to its modern technology sectors and key economic indicators. It is cut off from the international financial system and subject to export bans on goods of American and European origin, from advanced technology to aircraft parts, entering a recessive spiral. New sanctions approved by the European Parliament, which call for a complete and immediate embargo on Russian oil and natural gas imports, as well as a significant expansion of the sanctions list, will make conditions for Moscow more difficult in the long term.
As the war becomes protracted and attritional, the delivery of Western aid has also seen ups and downs. Although the Euro-Atlantic axis is providing new weaponry in the new phases, including F-16 fighters and longer-range missiles, the implementation of the $60 billion US aid package lacks clarity with Trump in the White House. However, the European Union is arduously pursuing the operationalization of a $50 billion, 4-year aid package, and Japan continues its $4.7 billion in aid to Kyiv. Despite all this, some analysts believe this campaign is approaching critical stages, and neither side still has a high chance of winning. Any move toward a ceasefire will face strong resistance from the Kremlin, the Ukrainian government, some NATO members (including Poland and the Baltic states), and significant segments of the Western political and media establishment.
Therefore, the outcome of such a crisis cannot currently be predicted. However, considering the trend of developments in recent months and the change in Trump's approach to aiding the Ukrainian army, it can be clearly stated that the risk of escalation into an all-out war between NATO and Russia will be high. And the important question remains: will the overt threats from Russia, voiced by Medvedev, regarding the possible use of nuclear weapons against European states, and President Putin's testing of nuclear bombers in Tatarstan, and finally, on the opposing front, the aerial attack on Russian territory with long-range missiles and F-16 fighters, be operationalized or not?
Dr. Ali Beman Eghbali Zarch - Senior Expert in Eurasian Studies
(Responsibility for the content of this article rests with the author and does not reflect the views of the Center for Political and International Studies.)