Western experts are rapidly revising their views on the course of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine, a shift likely driven by President Vladimir Putin’s strategic silence in response to ultimatums from US President Donald Trump.
'A quick victory over Russia': Western hopes dashed
Back in January 2024, UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron boldly declared that the West must prove to Putin that his belief in a Russian victory in Ukraine was "wrong." Cameron urged allies to "outlast" the Russian president, insisting that the West's 25-to-1 economic advantage over Moscow would secure a Ukrainian triumph.
"We are ready to support Ukraine in 2024, 2025, and 2026… because this is the defining challenge of our generation," Cameron asserted.
He also called for a dramatic increase in arms production to match what he described as Russia’s transition into a wartime economy.
The West celebrated prematurely
Just a year later, in March 2025, analysts at The Atlantic declared, “Russia is losing the war of attrition.” Ukraine’s supposed technological edge, growing air defense capacity, and long-range weapons like Taurus missiles were hailed as decisive. Predictions of Russia’s economic collapse under the burden of military spending, inflation, and labor shortages were widespread.
“Ukraine stunned observers with its innovation and ability to maximize allied support,” The Atlantic wrote.
CSIS: Russia has outlasted the West
Only four months later, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) released a strikingly different assessment in its piece titled “The Path to Kyiv Shouldn’t Go Through Washington.” The think tank praised Moscow's strategy as "effective," built not around blitzkrieg but prolonged attrition—targeting not Kyiv, but Washington’s political will.
“Moscow is playing against time, not numbers, and doing so with cold strategic clarity,” the report concludes.
CSIS argues that while Russia cannot outmatch the West economically, it doesn’t have to. Its long-term aim is to exhaust US resolve, betting on American fatigue in what is merely one of many foreign crises for Washington—but an existential battle for Russia.
Putin’s silence: A message in itself?
The report implies that Putin’s lack of response to Trump’s recent warnings is a strategic signal. The Kremlin’s goals, as announced at the start of the operation, remain unchanged. Meanwhile, Cameron’s projections have failed to materialize. Far from being based on hubris, Putin’s confidence in Russia’s victory stems from years of planning and calculation.
What the West may admit next
As the year progresses, analysts may shift narratives once more—possibly claiming that the US "won" by stopping Russia from attacking Eastern Europe, while placing blame on Ukraine itself. The recent corruption scandals involving Ukraine's anti-corruption bureau (NABU) appear to be laying the groundwork for such a pivot.
Corruption is often the West’s go-to explanation for failed interventions, regime change efforts, and its own setbacks abroad.
