Sergiu Constantin

The primary driver of this war remains the situation on the ground - specifically, how far Russia can push the frontline. The extent of its frontline advances largely shapes Moscow’s willingness to continue the war. However, even in the absence of major progress, Russia has shown no hesitation in sustaining its war effort. At least, for now. To truly shift the calculus in Ukraine’s favor, there must be a combination of a stalled frontline and mounting costs for Russia - not just in monetary terms, but in strategic capacity. These costs include Russia’s diminishing ability to project power globally, compete economically with the West and China, and maintain its status as a relevant geopolitical force. Today's attack is a clear example of a strike that, while not directly influencing the battlefield, significantly erodes Russia’s long-term strategic assets - many of which are Soviet-era legacies that Russia cannot replace in the near term. The loss of AWACS aircraft, a quarter of the Black Sea Fleet, much of its Soviet-era armored inventory, a substantial portion of its attack helicopter fleet, its positions in Syria, and now a major blow to its strategic aviation - all cumulatively weaken Russia’s global military reach. If Ukraine can continue to hold the line, even if that means gradual tactical withdrawals from small settlements while stalling Russian forces at the operational-strategic level, then the ever-increasing cost of war may eventually compel the Kremlin to acknowledge a sobering reality: that continuing the war not only worsens the situation in Ukraine, but accelerates Russia’s own strategic decline. The Russian leadership is well aware of this dynamic. The notion that Russia will fight “no matter what” or until the last soldier falls in Ukraine - is largely a product of psychological warfare. It’s a narrative actively promoted by Russian propaganda to instill a sense of inevitability: that Ukraine and the West are doomed to lose because Russia possesses limitless endurance. But this is a myth - one that history has already disproven. The Khasavyurt Accords of 1996 serve as a clear example, when Russia was forced to accept its inability to sustain the war in Chechnya and ultimately agreed to a ceasefire. Just like then, there are limits to Russia’s political, economic, and military resilience - despite the image of invincibility it tries to project.