The war in Ukraine risks being prolonged, again, as the Ukrainian counteroffensive appears to have failed in achieving any of its goals. A new report by Responsible Statecraft, written by journalist Branko Marcetic, explained that "a forever war seems to be brewing in Ukraine."

Marcetic has taken statements from a number of Western publications including the Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal, and POLITICO, as he underscored that the rhetoric of a forever war appears to have become prominent in Western media. 

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) underscored that the war in Ukraine is likely to become “a protracted struggle that lasts several more years,” especially noting the US' Maximilian rhetoric and the "complete victory" approach arguing that Ukraine must retake all territories lost to Russia since the start of the war, which WSJ now describes as "a distant prospect."

Similarly, former Democratic congressman and Obama administration State Department official Tom Malinowski, who now serves as a senior fellow at the McCain Institute, wrote for Politico and contended that “for the war in Ukraine to end on terms consistent with American interests and ideals, Ukraine must be seen to have won, and Russia’s invasion must go down in history as a decisive failure," adding that "Ukraine will never be a victory for Russia — never."

Marcetic said that even Russia has come to the conclusion that the war in Ukraine will extend, as Deputy Security Council Chairman Dmitry Medvedev recently explained that “should it [the war] take years or even decades, then so be it.” 

A good time to end the war?

The Responsible Statecraft report underscored that Ukraine's failed counteroffensive resulted in a pushback for ceasefire negotiations as the government in Kiev argued that the cause of failure was the lack of proper equipement, weaponry, and ammunition. Ukraine made that argument despite the agreed-upon conclusion reached by military experts in which they noted that no weapon could serve as a "magic bullet" in the face of Russia's lines of defense.

This begged the question, what happens if the next Spring counteroffensive, which appears to be what the collective West has now begun preparing for, also failed? Will the ceasefire negotiations be pushed back once again or will the collective-West seek to end the war saving face with whatever they had left in Ukraine? How many more years will that war go on for?

Marcetic even put forward an alternative potentiality that very few even consider as a possibility at this point, arguing that "Even if Kyiv does stage a successful operation against Russian forces in the future, it’s not clear it will lead to an end of the war."

Related News

Spain rebukes Trump’s NATO expulsion threat over defense spending

NATO launches annual nuclear drills amid rising tensions

Read more: By ‘vilifying’ Putin, 'idolizing' Zelensky; US moulds war narrative

Two possibilities

For Marcetic there were two possibilities, either Moscow would decide to launch its own counteroffensive in an effort to reverse any gains acquired by Ukrainian forces, perhaps igniting an interminable cycle of military back-and-forth.

Or the developments of events that took place last fall would repeat themselves, when Kiev and its NATO allies, bolstered by the significant victories achieved by Ukraine's counteroffensive in September, rejected the concept of negotiations in favor of pursuing "complete victory," at an ultimately terrible cost.

Marcetic dubbed the concept of complete victory pushed forward by some Congressmen in the US as the maximalist goals of restoring Ukraine's pre-2014 borders. That, argued the journalist, has driven the pushback for ceasefire negotiations time and time again.

However, a forever war is not something frowned upon by many NATO officials who according to the Responsible Statecraft report, had "hoped for from the start in order to trap Russia in its own Afghanistan-like blunder." Marcetic paralleled his argument with a statement published in the New York Times, in March of 2022, when a report read that the administration “seeks to help Ukraine lock Russia in a quagmire.”

In brief, Marcetic argued that despite some officials pushing for a forever war in Ukraine, the decision would not yield any good results for Kiev which has already paid an unimaginable human cost and massive economic costs, noting that a prolonged war will only drive further debt and strain global relations and supply chains, thus affecting cost-of-living costs everywhere, while also continuously threatening a catastrophic NATO-Russia war that could escalate to become a nuclear war.

Read more: US wants Ukraine to go all in on counteroffensive, take all risks: FT

A US problem

The Responsible Statecraft report could also be considered a US problem as it would likely play a significant role in the 2024 election if the war happens to extend that long. Significantly, incumbent US President Joe Biden ran for office four years ago with the promise to bring "forever wars" to begin an era of “relentless diplomacy,” according to Marcetic. 

In turn former US President and current Presidential candidate, Donald Trump, has reportedly taken a pro-diplomacy position vis-a-vis the war in Ukraine.

As such, a prolonged war in Ukraine could be considered, according to Marcetic, a political liability. 

Even American officials are now covertly acknowledging that Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Mark Milley "had a point" when he urged Ukraine to maximize its advantages by negotiating for peace late last year. At the time, Milley explained that "we may have missed a window to push for earlier talks," but acknowledged that the time to do so may still be viable now.

Read more: US against two difficult options in Ukraine: Both are grim