THE COUNTEROFFENSIVE IS ON: After weeks of clearing land mines and probing for weaknesses along the border with Russia, Ukrainian troops have finally begun to move in earnest. The counteroffensive really didn’t start until the past few days.
RUSSIA HAS MORE TROOPS, but many are poorly trained. Ukrainian troops still have a huge advantage in morale, and they have Western tanks and other arms. And Moscow seems in disarray, with the threat of an uprising from the Wagner Group’s Yevgeniy Prigozhin a constant threat.
THUS THE PROSPECT OF A UKRAINIAN VICTORY — not just a land grab in the east and south — is still an electrifying scenario. We understand that Crimea is still a huge obstacle to a truce; a partition, like East/West Germany is an option if both sides are exhausted later this year.
BUT THERE’S ONE ENORMOUS WILD CARD that worries officials in Washington, including President Biden. If Putin sees his forces retreating and his power fading, there’s always the nuclear option — the use of relatively small tactical weapons that could take out several city blocks.
THIS OPTION IS THE MAJOR REASON why Biden is reluctant to bring Ukraine into NATO now, because that would obligate the alliance to defend its new member — and any direct conflict between the U.S. and Russia could lead to World War III, as Biden frequently warns, mostly in private.
OUR FAVORITE COLUMNIST, the Washington Post’s David Ignatius, writes about a private briefing with Jake Sullivan, Biden’s national security adviser, who assessed whether the U.S. and its NATO partners could help Ukraine repel Russia’s invasion without triggering a direct NATO-Russia conflict that might lead to use of nuclear weapons.
IGNATIUS WRITES THAT most Washington hawks think a nuclear threat is far-fetched, but Sullivan said in the briefing that “the threat is real. It’s one we need to take seriously. And it’s one that does evolve with changing conditions on the ground.” He’s referring to a disorderly Russian retreat.
IF A NUCLEAR THREAT LOOMS AS RUSSIANS RETREAT, there would be strong opposition to the nuclear option from China and India. Sullivan said both countries are “trying to indicate to Russia that it would be a terrible move for Russia . . . to actually deploy tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine.”
“BEIJING HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY SURPRISED BY EVENTS,” Sullivan said. “They misjudged the scope of Russia’s initial invasion, they didn’t expect the relatively poor quality and capacity of the Russian forces” and then “they were surprised by the events relative to Prigozhin.” Beijing keeps encountering unexpected events on the “downside.”
OUR BOTTOM LINE HASN’T CHANGED: Russia cannot win this war; Moscow is losing hundreds of troops every week and while they have slowed Kyiv’s advance, the Ukrainians continue to move forward.
WHILE THE FOCUS has been on Putin and Prigozhin, we suspect Volodmyr Zelinsky eventually will become the key player — he will have to consider a deal. Zelinsky may have to accept something less than 100% of his battered country in a settlement with Putin or his successor. Nevertheless, a humiliating defeat looms for Putin — which could make him even more irrational.
Related: Is It Absolutely, Positively Going to be Biden vs. Trump?
The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions of AGF, its subsidiaries or any of its affiliated companies, funds or investment strategies.
The views expressed in this blog are provided as a general source of information based on information available as of the date of publication and should not be considered as personal investment advice or an offer or solicitation to buy and/or sell securities. Speculation or stated believes about future events, such as market or economic conditions, company or security performance, or other projections represent the beliefs of the author and do not necessarily represent the view of AGF, its subsidiaries or any of its affiliated companies, funds or investment strategies. Every effort has been made to ensure accuracy in these commentaries at the time of publication; however, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Market conditions may change and AGF accepts no responsibility for individual investment decisions arising from the use of or reliance on the information contained herein. Any financial projections are based on the opinions of the author and should not be considered as a forecast. The forward looking statements and opinions may be affected by changing economic circumstances and are subject to a number of uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated in the forward looking statements. The information contained in this commentary is designed to provide you with general information related to the political and economic environment in the United States. It is not intended to be comprehensive investment advice applicable to the circumstances of the individual.
AGF Investments is a group of wholly owned subsidiaries of AGF Management Limited, a Canadian reporting issuer. The subsidiaries included in AGF Investments are AGF Investments Inc. (AGFI), AGF Investments America Inc. (AGFA), AGF Investments LLC (AGFUS) and AGF International Advisors Company Limited (AGFIA). AGFA and AGFUS are registered advisors in the U.S. AGFI is a registered as a portfolio manager across Canadian securities commissions. AGFIA is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland and registered with the Australian Securities & Investments Commission. The subsidiaries that form AGF Investments manage a variety of mandates comprised of equity, fixed income and balanced assets.