It was 1,000 days ago that Russia launched its full-scale invasion into Ukraine, and the grim milestone arrives with uncertainty and trepidation over what could come next.
The war has been in an effective stalemate for several months, with little movement on the front lines while death and destruction continue to mount. With the international focus increasingly centring on the need for a diplomatic settlement to stop the bloodshed, a change in U.S. administration from President Joe Biden to president-elect Donald Trump has shifted the political calculus for Ukraine’s western allies and raised questions about what negotiations could look like.
Not even a reported change in U.S. posture — allowing Ukraine to use American-supplied long-range weapons to strike within Russian territory — is expected to change the outlook on the battlefield.
“This is an attempt by the Biden administration — by Biden himself — really to do what he can before he leaves office to strengthen Ukraine’s negotiating position in the inevitable peace talks that are coming,” said Andrew Rasiulis, a senior fellow at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute and former defence official in the federal government, about the long-range weapons decision, which has not been publicly confirmed by U.S. or Ukrainian officials.
For Ukraine itself, the stated goal remains the same as it was 1,000 days ago: defend its territorial integrity and achieve a lasting peace.
The next few months, diplomats and analysts agree, will be decisive — and the hunger for an end to the war is palpable.
“The Ukrainian people have suffered enough,” said Oleh Nikolenko, Ukraine’s consul general in Toronto. “We don’t want another 1,000 days.”
Both Ukraine and Russia have kept their military casualty numbers closely guarded, and western intelligence reports have offered varying estimates, leaving exact numbers unclear. There is a consensus among those reports that, at a minimum, tens of thousands of soldiers have been killed on both sides.
The United Nations human rights office said Monday that at least 12,162 civilians have been killed since Russia’s full-scale invasion began on Feb. 24, 2022, including 659 children, while at least another 26,919 civilians have been injured.
Over 90 per cent of those casualties are a result of explosive attacks, the report said, amid Russia’s ongoing bombardment campaign targeting Ukrainian civilian and and critical infrastructure.
According to the UN, Ukraine’s population has declined by 10 million, or around a quarter, since the start of the invasion, which has also caused the birth rate to collapse by about a third, sent more than six million Ukrainians fleeing abroad to Europe and displaced nearly four million inside the country.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.
Entire cities and towns in the eastern and southern front-line area have been completely destroyed.
Russia now occupies and claims to have annexed around a fifth of Ukraine, an area around the size of Greece. That territory includes provinces that Russian proxy forces seized in 2014, leading to a years-long civil war that precipitated Moscow’s full-scale invasion.
Despite the scale of devastation, Ukraine managed against all predictions to beat back Moscow’s stated goal of toppling Kyiv and undermined the Kremlin’s military superiority, something Nikolenko said he’s “not surprised” by.
He said Ukrainians at home and abroad, while “exhausted,” are determined to hold on to what they have — and fight for the return of what’s been taken.
“Now is high time for our partners in the international community to step up their efforts to help bring about justice for Ukraine,” he said. “And of course, if we do not do that, the Russian appetite will grow.”
Rasiulis said the past 1,000 days have, among other things, shown the “failure” of risk calculus that may have extended the war longer than was feasible.
He pointed all the way back to November 2022, when the then-chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, general Mark Milley, said Ukraine was in a position of strength to push for peace talks with a Russia reeling from successive military failures.
Instead, talks were ruled out, and Russia was able to fortify its defensive lines and stop a Ukrainian counteroffensive from gaining significant ground last summer.
As the standstill dragged on — and the U.S. Congress stalled on approving more military aid — the Ukrainians were steadily battered by wave after wave of Russian troops, missile attacks and airstrikes, and Russia was able to make some strategic gains.
Despite being stretched and outgunned, Ukraine managed to surprise once again in August, when it launched a surprise incursion into Russia and seized hundreds of square kilometres in the Kursk region — territory it still holds.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration, Ukraine’s top backer, has been slow to provide numerous kinds of weaponry Ukraine has asked for, and cautious on how it allows those weapons to be used. It delayed the deliveries of Abrams tanks and long-range ATACMS last year, fearing escalation from Russia against NATO.
Despite repeated requests by Ukraine to use those U.S.-supplied missile systems to strike deep in Russian territory and destroy its long-range capabilities, Biden has been slow to authorize such requests. He briefly allowed those strikes against Russian forces that were launching cross-border attacks on the city of Kharkiv earlier this year.
On Sunday, The Associated Press and Reuters reported that Biden would lift the restrictions to allow strikes on Russian forces seeking to take back the land in Kursk, and also beat back thousands of North Korean troops sent to assist Moscow’s counter-offensive.
Defence Minister Bill Blair on Monday said the U.S. decision was “important” to help Ukraine defend itself, and aligned with Canada’s long-standing support for long-range attacks against Russia.
Biden’s deputy national security advisor Jon Finer dismissed the Kremlin’s warning that the decision was throwing oil on the fire of the conflict, telling reporters Monday: “The fire was lit by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.”
“The Ukrainians are desperately trying to hold on … to that territory (in Kursk) so that when the negotiations finally do come, the Ukrainians will be able to trade some land” in exchange for Russian-held Ukrainian territory, Rasiulis said. “That’s the calculus (for the U.S. decision).”
Those negotiations could come as soon as early 2025, particularly if Trump follows through on his pledge to end the war quickly upon taking office — though he won’t say how.
Russia has said it would be open to negotiations to end the war if initiated by Trump, and if Ukraine acknowledges the “realities on the ground.” That is believed to mean Ukraine would have to give up the regions Russia claims to have annexed.
U.S. vice-president-elect JD Vance and other Trump advisors have suggested a final peace settlement would include Ukraine giving up that territory, agreeing not to join NATO and turning the current front line into a demilitarized zone, which some experts fear would not lead to a lasting peace. Some of those advisors, including Trump’s former acting director of national intelligence Richard Grenell, criticized Biden’s decision loosening long-range weapons restrictions.
Whether Trump listens to those voices or to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy may not be known until Trump takes charge in January.
Rasiulis said a comprehensive ceasefire settlement that includes western-backed security guarantees to prevent another Russian invasion would be the best and likeliest course. He added that a broader, long-term European security agreement will also be necessary to build confidence in the new post-war world order.
Zelenskyy is projecting optimism and a desire to work with the Trump administration to ensure Ukraine has a strong negotiating hand.
“From our side, we must do everything so that this war ends next year, ends through diplomatic means,” Zelenskyy said in a Ukrainian radio interview aired on Saturday. He added the war was likely to end quicker under Trump, despite previously criticizing the president-elect’s stance.
Nikolenko said any suggestions of Ukraine ceding land to Russia in peace talks was a “red line” that went against Trump’s stated worldview.
“Grabbing territories by force, imposing will by force — we don’t want to live in this type of world,” he said. “And this does not align with what president-elect Donald Trump actually sees when he talks about peace and security in the world.”
— With files from Reuters and The Associated Press
Read the full article here
