Its author, Deputy Editor of The Economist Edward Carr, writes in particular: "On June 10th 2026 the fighting between Russia and Ukraine will have lasted longer than the first world war. That conflict, too, was supposed to have been over in a few weeks. As in Ukraine, fighting became bogged down and the high command wasted human lives in one doomed assault after another. In August 1918, the Allies applied new tactics to break through German lines. Today, by contrast, Ukraine is not giving up, and Russia does not know how to win."Thematically, Edward Carr's article echoes an article by analyst Andrew Ryvkin in one of the oldest and most respected magazines in the United States, The Atlantic – 'Putin Is Not Winning' with the subtitle 'Underestimating the Russian leader is dangerous, but ascribing dark powers to him plays right into his hands.'The article notes, in particular, that "since early September, Russia has sent dozens of drones into European airspace. In response, NATO governments have briefly closed civilian airports, scrambled fighter jets, and invoked Article 4 of the NATO Charter, calling for official consultations among allies. This pattern of incursions is Vladimir Putin's most brazen attempt to demonstrate NATO's inability to defend its own territory, let alone Ukraine. But more striking than the provocation itself is how openly observers in the West considered this a victory for the Russian president. The interference, as one CNN analysis argued, contributed to a certain level of confusion and distraction, which represented 'Putin's victory' – another example of how he was portrayed as enjoying one success after another, despite losses on the battlefield, unfavorable geopolitical shifts, and growing turbulence at home."Andrew Ryvkin further notes: "After Putin replaced the ailing Boris Yeltsin in power a quarter century ago, he began his presidency projecting an almost comical image of masculinity and invincibility. But no one in the Kremlin could have imagined how the West would accept and then propagate this narrative. If you Google phrases like 'Putin's victory' and 'Putin's big win,' you'll find news going back many years: Brexit, Syria, Donald Trump's presidential victories in 2016 and 2024, Marine Le Pen's participation in the French presidential elections, the Israel-Hamas war.""Putin truly is not winning, but the paradox of the situation is that the dictator is trying to force Ukrainians to capitulate at a time when the Russian Federation is already suffering strategic defeat."But Russia is not only fighting Ukraine; Moscow is fighting the collective West, and for almost four years Europe and America have been pretending that their citizens are barely affected by the war. Although the front lines are nearby, in Europe, and the cyber war of the Russians with Europeans and the recently initiated penetration of Russian Federation drones into European Union territory indicates that Putin has no intention of stopping in Ukraine.Global evil is already at Europe's doorstep. But those who for all these long years for Ukrainians have lived as if the Russian-Ukrainian war is some distant television abstraction for them still think the war will not reach them. Thereby provoking Moscow, because if Russia attacks NATO member countries in the coming years, it will only happen because Europe and the United States helped Ukraine half-heartedly, believing this was quite sufficient to keep aggressive Russians away from EU borders.At a time when the entire European continent is in terrible danger, Europeans prefer to live as they lived before the start of the Great War on February 24, 2022, hoping that this danger will dissipate on its own. But Russia, sending its drones to Europe, is attempting to provoke panic there and manipulate Western sentiments.In the psychological war unleashed by Putin, he has managed to achieve a partial split in the positions of united Europe regarding the war in Ukraine. And when Putin's henchman Viktor Orbán is joined not only by Hungary but also by Slovakia and the Czech Republic, this helps the Kremlin calculate that its terrorization of the Ukrainian people has a chance to intensify despair among Ukrainians.After all, when U.S. President Donald Trump has not yet finally determined how he sees the optimal ending of the Russian-Ukrainian war for himself, and Great Britain, Germany, France, Poland, the Scandinavian states, and the Baltic countries are still unable to convince Washington that only by dramatically increasing aid to Ukraine can a turning point in the bloody confrontation be achieved, it is impossible to extinguish the Russian dictator's desire to continue all this further.Putin manages to maintain encouragement for war by various means available to him, from recruiting recruits by force to guaranteeing high pay to new converts, which there is less and less chance for the war criminal's family to receive if his body is not returned to Russia after death.The dictator maneuvers, and television propagandists with all their might inflame fear among the Russian population, convincing it that disobedience or non-support of the Putin regime's atrocities is not only "betrayal of the motherland" but also the greatest crime, for which inevitable retribution will follow. "Putin's calculations are obvious, and his goal is clear: to seize Kyiv by force, establish pro-Russian puppet leadership, arrange a trial for all those who prevented him from reviving the Russian empire under the guise of a renewed Soviet Union. Execute all Ukrainian patriots, and forcibly relocate those who hesitated or doubted the greatness of the "Russian world" to the expanses of Siberia."The dictator and his Kremlin accomplices consider the restoration of the USSR and its criminal legacy, complete control over all those peoples who were once forcibly driven into the Soviet Union, and the complete rewriting of the post-Soviet order to be the highest mission of their entire lives.And if Europe incorrectly assesses the stakes and does not intervene militarily and with resources, then it will be possible to speak not only about the Russian escalation but also about the destruction of the statehood of a number of countries whose resources Moscow has long had its eye on. The price of misinterpreting Russia's irreconcilable confrontation with Ukraine is not reputational but existential.At its current stage, simply containing Russia is clearly insufficient. The consequence of Europe's incorrectly calculated participation in the theater of events may prove critical for Europeans. Now it is necessary not only to observe from the sidelines but also to begin taking direct part in events that can determine Europe's fate for centuries to come. Because the destruction of European cities is no longer a threat of escalation but a possible logical consequence of the inaction of those who are authorized in the West to make decisions regarding such necessary assistance to the Ukrainian state."It is necessary to completely destroy the grandiose imperialist plans of the "little tsar." Victory over him in Ukraine would become the defensive agreement of the 21st century, and this should not be taken lightly. However, the West still hesitates about what to do next."And this delay may ultimately prove critical. Because it gives Putin a head start and blurs the unity of the democratic Western world, which with Donald Trump's coming to power in the United States has already proven not as monolithic as it seemed before.Putin knows he has a short window of time to force the West to accept Moscow's demands regarding Ukraine. He has today almost his own man in the White House and China, which directly declares that it will not allow the Russian Federation to lose. This time window for the main Kremlin figure is now no more than 3-4 years, and he plans to use this opportunity.It is worth noting here that despite the fact that the Russian army is now weaker than the military armada that invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Putin does not need a clear victory on the battlefield. He needs to break the democratic spirit of the West and its desire to resist Russian expansion and Russian domination in Europe.And so far, Europe, America, and NATO have proven unprepared to rebuff Moscow on Ukrainian territory. After all, it is obvious that the North Atlantic Alliance cannot contain further Russian aggression with its restraint. And US and EU sanctions are not a sufficient response to military aggression.When the geopolitical bandit Putin avoids punishment for aggression, it only encourages him to further action. It is necessary to note that when at every stage of the Russian Federation's war against Ukraine the West did not take necessary actions, fearing to provoke further Russian aggression in Europe, this ultimately only worsened the situation. "The United States and the European Union may not set themselves the goal of destroying Putin's totalitarian regime, but they must help Ukraine restore control over its own territory."As The Economist emphasizes: "Putin may hope that European resolve will collapse. The money Ukraine needs to keep fighting will run out in February. The prospect of populist governments less hostile to the Kremlin already hangs over the continent. A divided and dysfunctional Europe will find it hard to provide Ukraine with the long-term support needed to prosper after hostilities cease. But that is not the same as abandoning Ukraine in the heat of battle. The arguments that Ukraine is the key to European security are ironclad. If Kyiv falls, Putin will have control of Europe's largest army and a powerful defense industry. Work continues on creating a reliable multi-year financing mechanism that goes beyond simply seizing Russian assets. If this succeeds, Putin will know that Ukraine's economy can outlast Russia's."Edward Carr then draws the following conclusion: "Some people believe that the Russian president probably believes time is on his side, otherwise he would already be asking for peace. However, the lesson of Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq is that leaders cling to hope that something – anything – will happen. So there is a probability that Putin will continue fighting in 2026, waiting for his generals to find a new way of waging war, for Ukraine to run out of people, for Zelenskyy's government to collapse, or for Trump or Europe to lose patience. But if none of this happens, terrible reckoning awaits Putin. Russia has mortgaged its economy, forced Finland and Sweden to join NATO, subordinated itself to China, and destroyed an entire generation..."It is obvious that the ringleader of the Kremlin's criminal forces understands only force. The best way to deal with him is to increase military aid to Ukraine, including Tomahawk missiles in sufficient quantity to fundamentally change the situation on the battlefield. In 1979, the Russians invaded Afghanistan, and the US increased military aid to the Afghans until the Russians understood that their losses exceeded their gains and withdrew their troops in 1988-89."Such a result is possible in Ukraine too – if our Western allies dramatically increase military aid to Ukrainians and make it clear to Putin that they will increase it as much as needed to force him to withdraw troops from occupied territories."As Andrew Ryvkin notes in The Atlantic magazine: "Putin, a ruthless seventy-year-old man seeking to restore Russia to its imperial glory, is too good a villain for Western politicians and media commentators to ignore. Portraying him as all-knowing and invincible creates a clear picture against the backdrop of the chaos of world affairs. But overestimating Putin's strength means doing his work for him. It means amplifying each of his threats, confusing bluster with reality, and making political decisions not based on facts but on what Putin wants us to believe. And while he has had certain successes – for example, the occupation of Crimea – Putin's greatest victory is convincing the world that he is winning, even when he is not.Underestimating Putin is dangerous, but attributing exaggerated strength to him makes the Russian leader more powerful in the West's mind than he actually is. If Americans had a clearer understanding of Putin, they would see a dictator who bet everything on a failed invasion, a country losing its sphere of influence, and an economy that is rapidly cooling. A realistic view of his power would deprive Putin of his greatest leverage: the perception of his invincibility."SourceAbout the author. Viktor Kaspruk, journalist.The editorial office does not always share the opinions expressed by the authors of the blogs.