Tulsi’s Assessment That Putin Doesn’t Want To Conquer All Of Ukraine Is Absolutely Correct

There are logical military and strategic reasons why he’s not interested in this whatsoever at all.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard responded to a report from Reuters alleging that “Putin has not abandoned his aims of capturing all of Ukraine and reclaiming parts of Europe that belonged to the former Soviet empire”. Tulsi condemned that as a “lie” to undermine Trump’s peace efforts and thus risk a possible hot Russian-US war. She also claimed that “Russia’s battlefield performance indicates it does not currently have the capability to conquer and occupy all of Ukraine, let alone Europe.”

Her assessment is absolutely correct for the reasons that’ll now be explained. For starters, Putin authorized the special operation after diplomacy failed to neutralize Ukrainian-emanating threats from NATO, ergo why Russia was compelled to resort to force. Unlike what many “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” nowadays claim on social media, “The ‘War Of Attrition’ Was Improvised & Not Russia’s Plan All Along”, occurring only because the UK and Poland unexpectedly sabotaged spring 2022’s peace deal.

Unprecedented support from NATO led to the aforesaid “war of attrition” and resultant stalemate along large parts of the front for protracted periods of time. As was assessed as early as that summer in July 2022, “All Sides Of The Ukrainian Conflict Underestimated Each Other”, which is why this support caught Russian planners off guard but also why it failed to inflict a strategic defeat upon Russia too. These 20 constructive critiques of Russia’s special operation from November 2022 are also relevant to this day too.

Even if Russia achieves a long-awaited breakthrough across the front, whatever territory it steamrolls into beyond that of the four disputed regions would likely only be for leverage for coercing Ukraine into complying with more of Putin’s demands for peace in exchange for withdrawing from there. Expanding Russia’s territorial claims through the holding of referenda in new regions would require controlling a significant amount of their land with an equally significant amount of people still there to participate.

Neither can be taken for granted, especially that locals won’t flee as refugees either deeper into Ukraine or across the front lines into Russia, hence the unreliability of this scenario. The strategic consequences could also be disproportionately severe if this ever unfolds since Trump could be provoked into escalating US involvement in the conflict after feeling like Putin disrespected him by doing this amidst their peace talks or possibly even manipulated him by supposedly only participating in them to buy time.

Trump has slammed Biden for the US’ complete loss of Afghanistan so he’s unlikely to let Putin conquer all of Ukraine in the political fantasy that this one day becomes possible. An escalation of US involvement in response could see it approve NATO allies’ entrance into Ukraine for drawing a “red line” as far east as possible and threaten direct “retaliation” against Russia if those forces are attacked en route. Putin has done his utmost to avoid World War III up until this point so he’s unlikely to suddenly risk it in that event.

There’s also the threat of a terrorist insurgency all across Western Ukraine if Russian forces ever reach that far, which could be costly for the Kremlin in terms of lives, treasure, and opportunities, something that Putin would likely seek to avoid as well. Bearing all this in mind, from the military difficulties to the disproportionately severe strategic consequences of claiming territory beyond the disputed regions, Tulsi is therefore absolutely correct in assessing that Putin doesn’t want to conquer all of Ukraine.