Standoff on the Eastern Front

What do Russia’s recent wins on the battlefield mean for the conflict in Ukraine? Robert Hamilton on the high-tech transformation of warfare—and the inevitability of a high-pressure deadlock. Brought to you by [Meco]( Subscribe to The Signal? Share with a friend. … Sent to you? Sign up [here](. Recently from The Signal: Mujtaba Rahman on [why Europe’s leaders can’t agree about Europe]( . … Today: What do Russia’s recent wins on the battlefield mean for the conflict in Ukraine? Robert Hamilton on the high-tech transformation of warfare—and the inevitability of a high-pressure deadlock. … Also: Omair Ahmad on the Indian general election’s unexpected twist. The New Art of War Alex Shuper After an autumn and winter of stalemate, Russian forces have captured territory along Ukrainian front lines over the past month. Launching an offensive into areas north of Kharkiv, in northeastern Ukraine, they’ve taken control of villages Kyiv had [liberated in the fall of 2022](. During nighttime, they regularly fire barrages of missiles into Kharkiv; dozens of people have been killed or wounded; and around 11,000 have been evacuated. The Russians have also advanced along the front in the Donbas region, in eastern Ukraine, and even captured a village in the southeast. Since the assault began, Russia has made its biggest territorial gains since late 2022—and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky warned in late May that the Kremlin was preparing a major offensive in the east. Meanwhile, Kyiv has been facing shortages of manpower and materiel (though it should soon see an influx of critical weapons and equipment from a US$61 billion aid package recently [approved by the U.S. Congress](). So will Russia’s advances affect the course of the war? Robert Hamilton is the head of research at the Foreign Policy Research Institute’s Eurasia Program and a retired U.S. Army colonel. As Hamilton sees it, the question is actually, why have the Russians’ advances been so limited—and quickly slowed to an apparent halt—especially given the lack of Ukrainian firepower they’ve been up against? The answer, he says, is in an emerging and fundamental transformation of warfare as such. More and more, new surveillance technologies—above all, drones—and precision-guided weapons give the side on defense an enormous advantage. This is the main reason why Ukraine’s counter-offensive failed last summer; it’s also the main reason why neither side is likely to win significant territory this summer—or ever. It won’t change the course of the war; that will be determined by voting in American swing states this November, more than anything else—before the outcome is eventually determined at the negotiating table. But it will profoundly change both Moscow’s and Kyiv’s strategies for getting there. [Read on]( Advertisement From Robert Hamilton at The Signal: “There’s a larger, strategic problem with America’s approach to military aid in Ukraine. For almost two years now, [Washington has followed an incremental and risk-intolerant policy](, because it fears escalating the conflict beyond the current theater. The U.S. Department of Defense and the National Security Council aren’t thinking about what it would take for Ukraine to win the war. To be fair, there’s an argument that no amount of equipment would allow it to recapture all its territory and win entirely. But the strategy has been to send smaller quantities of equipment—and not the best weapons. It’s not a serious policy for giving Ukraine what it needs to win.” “Putin’s theory of victory is to outlast the West; he believes he can and will. A Trump presidency in the U.S. would be a gift to him, because that would be the end of major U.S. assistance to Ukraine, and a Trump White House would start a pressure campaign on the Ukrainians to make a deal to end the war. … The Ukrainians’ theory of victory is now based on making Crimea untenable for the Russians. Kyiv understands now that a major offensive maneuver is going to be difficult for them, and they’re unlikely to liberate the Donbas. So they want to make Russia’s presence in Crimea practically impossible—and they’re doing a good job of it. For both sides, Crimea is the crown jewel of this war.” “This war will end the same way almost every war ends: a negotiated settlement. But that’s not going to happen until both sides decide they’re better off talking than fighting. And right now, they believe they’ll get better deals by continuing to fight.” [Members can access the full conversation here]( Advertisement Ever stop yourself from signing up for a potentially amazing newsletter because you’re worried about cluttering your inbox? [Learn more]( NOTES You Never Know Rupinder Singh Voters in India delivered a surprising rebuke to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party in national elections that spanned six weeks and concluded on June 2, with the results declared today. The BJP has won, but it’s lost dozens of seats in the National Assembly—a result that’ll force the party to work with others and form a governing coalition. Modi will almost certainly serve a third term as prime minister—becoming only the second politician to in India’s history—but he’ll likely have to temper his Hindu-nationalist agenda in cooperating with more secular coalition partners. In February, Omair Ahmad [explored how over nearly 10 years in office, Modi had transformed India](—taking control of the country’s political institutions, turning the news media increasingly into organs of BJP propaganda, and entrenching the idea that only Hindus are true Indians. As Ahmad saw it, Indian democracy had effectively ceased to function. Now, he says, it’s showing provisional signs of life … Omair Ahmad: The outcome was stunning, given the BJP's dominance over state institutions, including the Election Commission; its huge financial resources, including via an electoral-bonds scheme that allowed the party to mop up [65.7 billion rupees]( (around US$800 million) before the Supreme Court declared it illegal; and near-total media dominance. That said, there were widespread grumblings about the facts that 10 years of Modi's premiership hadn’t created jobs and that companies from his home state, Gujarat, were winning all the contracts in other states. The big surprise was the country’s most populous state, Uttar Pradesh, which sends 80 out of 543 MPs to Parliament—and where Modi had controversially inaugurated a temple earlier this year on the site of a mosque that’d been torn down by a right-wing mob. The opposition alliance won 43 seats, including in Faizabad, the constituency where the temple is. Even if the BJP's vote share across India has only dipped by a little over 1 percent, its manifesto for the election—running to 48 pages—was short on detail and long on Narendra Modi, mentioning him 67 times; as such, it’ll be read as a defeat for him. [Read more notes]( Join The Signal—to support our independent current-affairs coverage, explore our archive, and unlock our full conversations with hundreds of contributors: [Become a member]( Coming soon: Sergey Radchenko on how seriously to take Vladimir Putin's nuclear threats … Subscribe to The Signal? Share with a friend. Sent to you? Sign up [here](. This email address is unmonitored. Please send questions or comments [here](mailto:concierge@thesgnl.com). To advertise with The Signal, inquire [here](mailto:advertise@thesgnl.com). Add us to your [address book](mailto:newsletter@thesgnl.com). Unsubscribe [here](. © 2024 [unsubscribe](