InterRegional for Strategic Analysis

On 19 February 2025, InterRegional for Strategic Analysis held a panel discussion entitled, "Kyiv’s Dilemma: The Chances of Ending the War in Ukraine," featuring David Des Roches, an associate professor at the Near East South Asia Center for Strategic Studies (NESA) in Washington, DC. The panel addressed military developments on the ground in Ukraine, as well as changes in American policy toward the war since the return of Trump and the potential repercussions of any prospective settlement of the conflict.Key TransformationsProfessor Des Roches began his talk by referencing the tactical and military developments that have changed the course of the war in Ukraine, with an emphasis on modern technologies and challenges on the ground, as follows:1- Cyberwarfare as a crucial element in the Ukrainian conflict: Professor Des Roches stressed that the war in Ukraine has highlighted the major shift in importance of cyberwarfare, which has moved from a secondary role to a crucial component of modern combat. Des Roches explained that these systems are used to disrupt communications, hamper drones, and jam GPS-guided weapons, making them essential for intelligence, surveillance, and fire support operations. Furthermore, Russia has deployed advanced systems in this field, while Ukraine has developed effective, cheaper alternatives, thus reflecting a shift in the nature of modern warfare.2- Expanded use of drones as their manufacturing costs have dropped: The panel’s keynote speaker pointed out that the war in Ukraine has shown that drones are no longer restricted to major military powers, but rather have become an essential part of the battlefield due to their reduced costs and ease of manufacture. Des Roches explained that these drones, which can be produced even in small workshops, can deliver explosive payloads—such as 82-mm mortar shells—with high accuracy, thus forcing armies to change their strategies to minimize exposure to drones.In this context, Des Roches stressed that Iran has emerged as a major supplier of drones in the Ukrainian war, having supplied Russian with Shahed drones and ballistic missiles. He also noted that, before they are deployed, Iranian Shahed drones are transported in disguise in ordinary civilian shipping containers. This role has strengthened Iran’s military and strategic influence in the war.However, Des Roches believes that Iran’s role faces increasing challenges, especially after Israeli strikes revealed the weakness of Iranian defense systems, such as the S-300, which could limit the effectiveness of future Iranian support for Russia. Des Roches also noted that mounting American pressure, along with the potential return of harsh sanctions, may increase Iran’s political and economic isolation and, in turn, reduce its ability to influence the outcome of the war.3- Reshaped air defense strategies: According to Des Roches, the Ukrainian war has demonstrated a major shift in air defense systems, making it necessary to integrate satellites, ballistic missile defense, and conventional and unmanned aircraft into a multi-layered system. Air defense no longer relies on a single system, but on a combination of systems that function at various levels to combat a diverse set of threats.Des Roches emphasized that systems such as the Patriot and Avenger have proven their effectiveness, while systems like the Russian Pantsir-S1 and S-300 have not achieved the expected performance. He also noted that the Ukrainian experience and Iranian attacks on Israel have highlighted the need for an integrated air defense instead of relying on a single system, such as the Iron Dome, which by itself cannot counter all potential threats.4- Ineffectiveness of the Russian battalion organization during the war: According to Des Roches, Russia’s combat organization, which was believed capable of effectively conducting mobile operations, has proven ineffective during the war in Ukraine, thus forcing Russia to gradually abandon its model. Des Roches noted that Russia’s model failed primarily due to its lack of defense against air defense assets, particularly drones, its inability to quickly repair vehicles, and problems with rapid distribution of fuel and network communications, thus hampering coordination among combat units. 5- Gaps in Ukraine’s offensive strategies: According to the main speaker, Ukraine’s counterattacks have encountered major challenges, necessitating greater public mobilization and increased troop numbers. Moreover, combat across a broad front weakens the concentration of resources and requires the redistribution of military efforts. Des Roches noted that one strategic choice involves a ground push toward Crimea, targeting Russia’s marine and rail supply lines, which would weaken Russian defenses and give Ukraine an opportunity to deliver a decisive blow.6- Impact of numerical disparity on the war’s field tactics: Des Roches explained that Russia’s numerical superiority has imposed fundamental changes in field tactics, as Moscow relies on continuous reinforcements, including troops from allies like North Korea. Human losses in the war have exceeded half a million dead, the highest number for Russia since World War II.On the other hand, Ukraine’s hampered ability to offset losses has prompted the adoption of flexible defense tactics dependent on drones and asymmetric operations. Des Roches emphasized that the ongoing loss of life will affect both parties’ ability to maintain their positions or launch offensive operations, which makes offsetting losses a key factor in the conduct of the war.Return of TrumpProfessor Des Roches explained that Trump’s return to the White House has led to fundamental changes in the US approach to Ukraine, which has repercussions for the priorities of military support, diplomatic negotiations, and relationships with European allies, as follows:1- Trump’s prioritization of domestic issues over the conflict in Ukraine: Des Roches pointed out that Trump considers the war in Ukraine a distraction from more pressing domestic issues. His approach is based on proposing numerous ideas, some of which do not reflect his actual intentions, leading to confusion over his positions. Des Roches noted that the Trump administration will focus on rapid changes inside the US during the first two years before the mid-term congressional elections, which may push the administration to minimize its involvement in the Ukrainian crisis, despite the presence of competent foreign policy advisors.Des Roches added that this approach is also reflected in defense policy. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth began with an isolationist approach, before re-focusing on internal reforms and strengthened combat capabilities—thus confirming that the priority will be on domestic military readiness rather than the devotion of major resources to support Ukraine.2- Trump’s push for Europe to bear greater responsibility for supporting Ukraine: Des Roches explained that the American administration believes that Europe should bear greater military responsibility for supporting Ukraine, given that the Russian threat directly affects European allies. Meanwhile, the US is focusing on countering Chinese expansion, which it considers an existential threat to its global standing.Des Roches believes that Washington is pushing for increased European assistance to Ukraine, arguing that the European countries should take the initiative to provide weapons and military support. However, this does not mean a total withdrawal of the US from the scene, but rather a realignment of strategic priorities.3- Reducing US miliary interventions abroad: Des Roches stressed that the Trump administration’s foreign policy approach focuses on reducing military interventions. Trump does not have a clear vision for the war in Ukraine or Middle East issues, and his administration lacks a unified position on the conflict in Ukraine. Des Roches noted that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has a position close to Trump’s and is expected to have a major influence on shaping the administration’s policies. Trump’s broader goal is to minimize the deployment of US ground troops abroad, while focusing on countering the strategic threat posed by China. 4- Pursuing a settlement that serves American interests in Ukraine: Des Roches underscored that Trump’s special envoy to Russia and Ukraine, retired General Keith Kellogg, is influential in shaping the administration’s policy toward the conflict, given his deep understanding of European security and US strategic interests. Des Roches noted that Kellogg is attempting to develop an applicable strategy that achieves American gains in Ukraine, whether through a military victory or a settlement that ensures Washington’s interests. Des Roches added that Kellogg’s influence within the administration may not be the most obvious, but he is one of the most prominent figures who will help define Trump’s approach to ending the conflict on terms favorable to the US.5- Trump’s tendency to exclude Europe from negotiations with Russia: Des Roches highlighted that the Trump administration is inclined toward minimizing Europe’s role in peace negotiations with Russia over Ukraine, raising questions about the viability of any potential settlement. Despite Europe’s support for Ukraine, it has not invested enough to ensure strong influence in the talks. Des Roches added that Trump has a "poker" approach, whereby an increased European role would require Europe to make greater financial and strategic contributions.6- President Trump’s intensified criticisms of the Ukrainian president: Des Roches stressed that Donald Trump has increased his criticisms of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, calling him a "dictator" and an unpopular leader and accusing him of dragging the US into a "war that couldn’t be won." Des Roches explained that this attack may affect the relationship between Washington and Kyiv, but it may not constitute a sufficient reason to halt US military aid to Ukraine, especially amid the ongoing war and the postponement of Ukrainian elections.Settlement RepercussionsAccording to Professor des Roches, the Ukraine conflict’s future trends point to the possible failure of a potential settlement and its transformation into a broader war, with expectations of worsening threats to European countries, especially in Eastern Europe, as follows:1- Small chance of success for any lasting political settlement of the Ukrainian war: Des Roches thinks that any prospective settlement of the Ukrainian conflict will not achieve a lasting peace but rather will be a short-term truce giving Russia the opportunity to rebuild its military capabilities. He believes that stopping the war now may pave the way for Russia’s imperialistic aspirations, with Moscow perhaps launching a new campaign over the next five years with the goal of annexing Ukraine in full.Des Roches pointed out that one possible scenario is the partition of Ukraine, with the eastern areas subject to Russian control and the western part becoming a Kremlin vassal state. Moscow may also try to impose control over the coast of the Black Sea, including Odessa, to increase its strategic influence in the region.2- Threat to European security if the conflict is resolved in Russia’s favor: Des Roches warned that any settlement of the Ukrainian conflict that favors Russia and Putin’s demands could have a negative impact on European security, particularly in countries that have historical ties with Russia, like Finland, Poland, and the Baltics. Des Roches added that Russia’s success in Ukraine may lead to limited disputes in Eastern Europe, which could push NATO to reinforce its military presence and redeploy American troops in large numbers, as happened after World War II. This would constitute an economic and military burden for the alliance.3- Increasing pressure on European leaders to reduce support for Ukraine: Des Roches suggested that the rising costs of supporting Ukraine may put European leaders under increasing domestic pressure, especially amid tough economic conditions. This could lead to growing popular discontent and demands to reduce military and financial aid. This challenge is more evident in countries that are suffering debt crises.According to Des Roches, while some leaders are aware of the importance of increasing long-term defense spending, other countries are hesitant to make tough decisions regarding their financial priorities. Nevertheless, the general trend indicates mounting pressure on Europe to reassess the scale of its support for Ukraine and make critical decisions about its future defense spending.4- Hindrances to European nations’ efforts towards military independence: Des Roches believes that the growing calls for European military independence are due in part to the desire of European countries to reduce their dependence on the US; such feelings have increased with the return of Donald Trump to the White House. Many European countries, except for Hungary, view him negatively due to his ambiguous positions towards the continent. However, these efforts face major challenges, most notably weak combat capabilities, since Europe’s efforts focus on building vast administrative structures rather than increasing the number of troops, ships, and planes. Des Roches stressed that this approach, despite the strong rhetoric in support of military independence, makes the success of these efforts unlikely in the near term.5- Growing role of Gulf states as a major source of energy for Europe: Des Roches thinks that a settlement of the war in Ukraine will have a major impact on the Gulf Cooperation Council states in terms of oil and gas supplies. He indicated that a Russian defeat could lead to long-term stability in energy markets, which could positively impact the Arab Gulf states. Des Roches added that disruption of Russian gas supplies to Europe has increased demand for liquefied natural gas from the Arab Gulf, which provides a strategic opportunity for the countries of the region to enhance their standing as a key energy source for European markets.In conclusion, Professor Des Roches emphasized that developments in the Ukraine conflict reflect broader geopolitical shifts. Although the Trump administration may try to separate Moscow from Beijing as part of its strategy to end the conflict, Russia’s increasing reliance on China, particularly economically and strategically, makes this hard to achieve. Given this reality, the future of the Ukrainian crisis will remain tied to the wider international competition between major powers, thus complicating any potential settlement.&nbsp;

The Chances of Ending the War in Ukraine (Panel Discussion)