By Segun Adediran
The French President, Emmanuel Macron, recently expressed optimism about ending the war in Ukraine, suggesting a peace deal could be struck before the French presidential election scheduled for April 2027. He mentioned Kyiv had signed a landmark defence deal to potentially procure 100 fighter jets. However, the reality on the ground suggests otherwise, as the aircraft procurement represents a long-term defence commitment rather than an immediate battlefield capability. The war has settled into a protracted struggle, making rapid political resolution highly improbable.
Vladimir Putin’s strategy in Ukraine has decisively shifted from the attempted grand, decisive military thrusts seen in 2022 to a patient, brutal war of attrition. His focus is no longer on sweeping mechanised manoeuvres designed for quick regime change, but on a long-term war footing aimed at outlasting the political and economic will of Ukraine and its Western allies. The Kremlin’s theory of victory is now fundamentally political: that the costs of the conflict—in lives, resources, and economic stability—will eventually lead to a collapse in Western support, forcing Ukraine to accept Moscow’s maximalist demands.
The Russian military has profoundly adapted to this positional warfare, revising its structure and tactics after suffering crippling losses in the initial phase of the war. Moscow now prioritises incremental gains in the east, particularly in Donetsk, pressing relentlessly around key logistics hubs like Pokrovsk. This tactic relies on the mass employment of modified glide bombs and thousands of FPV (First-Person View) drones for tactical fire support, exploiting tactical weaknesses and seams between Ukrainian unit boundaries.
This strategy involves massive casualties—reports indicate that total Russian military casualties, encompassing both killed and injured personnel, are now approaching or exceeding one million since the start of the full-scale invasion—but is designed to exploit Ukraine’s manpower constraints and dependence on external military support. The goal is to slowly envelop key settlements, forcing Ukrainian withdrawals and extending Russian control over contested oblasts.
Despite years of comprehensive Western sanctions, the Kremlin has managed to stabilise its public finances and mobilise its industrial base to sustain the conflict, potentially for two or three more years. The Russian economy is undergoing a massive militarisation effort, with the military-industrial complex absorbing an estimated 7 to 8 per cent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Defence spending alone is projected to reach its highest level since the Cold War era.
This immense fiscal commitment is being funded by transferring the cost onto Russian consumers and non-military businesses through various tax hikes, notably a proposed increase in the Value Added Tax (VAT), alongside continued high domestic borrowing. While this strategy has staved off an immediate collapse, it has led to an overheating economy, with inflation pressures and a civilian sector increasingly starved of labour and investment due to the mobilisation efforts.
The costs of this sustained war of attrition are immense and growing for both nations. Russia’s direct war expenditures are estimated to exceed $450 billion, contributing to the staggering military casualties noted previously. The fiscal strain is evident in Russia’s widening budget deficit, projected at 2.6 per cent of GDP for 2025 by some analysts, though official targets are sometimes lower. This deficit forces painful choices, including domestic borrowing and tax increases that reduce consumer welfare and limit long-term civilian economic growth.
Ukraine, the costs are existential. Kyiv faces a severe cash shortfall into 2026, requiring substantial and sustained international assistance. Current estimates suggest the need for at least $42 billion to $45.5 billion annually in external budgetary financing to maintain core state functions, salaries, and social payments. The long-term costs are staggering: the estimated reconstruction cost over the next decade is $524 billion. Damage to critical infrastructure alone is assessed at $176 billion, with the energy sector being the hardest hit—80 per cent of the country’s thermal power capacity has reportedly been destroyed or severely damaged, necessitating an immense and immediate investment in decentralised generation and air defence. The human toll is approximated at 400,000 Ukrainian military casualties, with over 9.5 million citizens displaced both internally and abroad.
Putin’s core objective remains absolute: preventing Ukraine’s Western integration, particularly into NATO and the European Union. This is non-negotiable for Moscow, as it views Ukraine’s neutrality and demilitarisation as essential for its own strategic security and regional dominance. Diplomatic overtures from Moscow are largely instruments of political warfare, aimed not at genuine peace, but at freezing the conflict lines, securing existing territorial gains, and eroding Western unity and sanctions regimes. Russia views its current operational and economic positions as advantageous, and has shown no willingness to return the occupied territories, including the Crimean peninsula and the annexed eastern and southern oblasts.
Its maximalist demands, which include a written pledge halting NATO expansion, comprehensive sanctions relief, and an internationally recognised neutral status for Ukraine, are designed to be unacceptable to Kyiv and its allies, thereby guaranteeing the continuation of the conflict on Moscow’s terms.
As the war enters its fifth year, Putin is expected to intensify his probing of NATO’s resilience through various hybrid actions. These include limited drone and missile incursions into NATO member airspace (such as Poland and Romania), cyberattacks targeting critical infrastructure across Europe, and the continued employment of massive disinformation campaigns to undermine public and governmental support for Kyiv in Western capitals.
The challenge for NATO and the EU lies not only in maintaining the volume of lethal aid—with Europe now surpassing the US in total military commitments—but also in rapidly scaling up its own defence industrial base to meet the high consumption rate of ammunition and equipment on the Ukrainian front. The failure to demonstrate a sustained, long-term commitment risks emboldening Moscow’s conviction that time is on its side.
The world should prepare not for a sudden, decisive ceasefire, but for a prolonged, multi-year conflict dictated by Moscow’s unwavering commitment to its long game. The conflict will continue to be a test of endurance, where Russia bets on Western fatigue and Ukraine fights for its survival and the integrity of its borders. Ukraine and NATO have repeatedly stated that Russia should not and will not be granted a veto power over Ukraine’s sovereign aspirations to join Western alliances. The outcome hinges on whether the collective strategic depth and industrial power of the West can be mobilised faster and more effectively than Russia’s authoritarian mobilisation of its own society and economy.
Adediran writes via segunadediran2002ng@yahoo.com
