The Italian debate on the progress of the conflict, and even more on its future developments, has so far been influenced by five expectations strongly rooted inpublic opinion. Five elements that were – and have increasingly proved to be – illusions or false myths.
Can Russia only win? It’s not for sure
Il first false myth was and partly still is the belief that Russia would easily and quickly win the war, and that it can still do so by drawing on hitherto unused military resources. Indeed, the fighting, maneuvering and logistical capabilities of the Russian forces had been overestimated even by many insiders. Instead, the weaknesses and errors in terms of overall strategy, planning, employment doctrine, chain of command and control, supplies and logistics, have weighed and weigh against Moscow, as well as endemic problems in terms of training of uniformed personnel, corruption and inefficiency of the Russian military-industrial complex. At the same time, elements such as leadership, morale, training, knowledge of the territory, strategies and tactics demonstrated by the Ukrainian forces – together with the fundamental support of Western countries, including Italy – in terms of means, training also on Ukrainian soil and intelligence, have moved the balance in favor of Kyiv.
Thirteen months of warfare against an adversary quite different from the Chechen or Syrian militias proved beyond any doubt the real Russian capabilities. Moscow scraped the bottom of the barrel as early as September 2022 by calling to arms tens of thousands of men with little and/or remote military experience, a mass that in the following six months did not even allow the Russian forces to take it easily Bakhmut, let alone all of Donbass. Even the notorious one Wagner companywhich had achieved victories against modest opponents in Africa and the Middle East, in the clash with Ukrainian forces has lost thousands of personnel eventually going so far as to recruit prisoners from Russian prisons – of dubious military capabilities – to be thrown into the fray.
In summary, there is no secret army or ultimate non-nuclear weapon that Moscow has so far kept in reserve. There is Russia’s military capacity for all to see to continue the war at this pace but not to make a qualitative leap, and therefore it is by no means certain that Russia will ultimately prevail.
The American or European solution weapon? Does not exist
The second, and partly specular, illusion is that each of the weapons progressively supplied by the West to Kyiv can be decisive in the conflict. Attention first focused on American artillery and missiles such as the Himars eh Patriotthen on European tanks – especially i Leopard Germans – and finally on the fighter planes sent from Poland and the Czech Republic.
In reality, no non-nuclear weapon system is decisive in a conflict of this size and complexity, and each piece of equipment can be more or less effective depending on how it is used, and therefore on the aforementioned factors in terms of strategy, doctrine of use , training, logistics, ammunition, etc. Himars, Patriot, Leopard, like the Samp-T anti-missile systems or the Italian armored vehicles, have each played a positive but limited role in the defense of Ukraine, and together with many other pieces of equipment they have been and are essential to withstand the impact of the Russian invasion and allow Ukrainian counter-offensives such as those that occurred at Lyman and Kherson.
Is it finally about? Not if I can win
The third illusion is that a peace deal is around the corner. An expectation placed first in the direct Russian-Ukrainian talks in the initial weeks of the invasion, then in the mediator role of the Türkiye and more recently in that of Chinese. In fact, the first direct talks have led to nothing, Turkish mediation has achieved an important but limited result on the export of Ukrainian grain via the Black Sea, and China’s political declaration on the conflict serves China’s position in the world more than it truly dialogue also with Kyiv and not only with Moscow. In reality, as long as the Russian or Ukrainian leadership believes, rightly or wrongly, that they can achieve a military victory, the conditions for serious peace negotiations will not exist, despite pressure from other international actors.
A proxy war? It is Ukraine that wants to defend itself
The fourth myth about the conflict is that it is somehow conducted by Moscow and Washington, while Kyiv is just an executor of Western strategy. The cohesion, resilience and courage shown by an entire nation of over 44 million inhabitants in 13 months of conflict, despite tens of thousands of casualties, about 10 million refugees, the enormous suffering and destruction suffered, demonstrates beyond all reasonable doubt that it is Ukraine that wants to defend itself, and that it is and will be up to the Ukrainian leadership to decide whether and when to bet on a peace deal with Moscow.
The Ukrainian resistance proved that this is not a proxy war: it is a Russian-led invasion against which an entire nation is defending itself tooth and nail. Certainly Kiev counts on the economic and military support of many democracies around the world, just as Moscow counts on the drones supplied by Iran and economic exchanges with China and other states that do not adhere to international sanctions, but the role of allies should not be overestimated to that of the two belligerents.
Nuclear World War III? Not today
The fifth myth about war is that it will inevitably and soon lead to one escalation nucleare and al NATO involvement. Over the past 13 months, Moscow has repeatedly threatened to use atomic weapons to intimidate Ukraine’s allies, but neither growing Western military supplies nor Russian defeats at Kyiv, Lyman and Kherson have prompted their use. Not even the rocket bombing that indirectly caused two deaths on Polish territory last fall, or the shooting down of an American drone over the Black Sea by Russian aircraft in March, have led to a nuclear escalation or NATO involvement in the conflict. .
As was the case during the Cold War, the nuclear deterrence exercised by the United States and by the Atlantic Alliance as a whole – which Finland has meanwhile joined – is sufficient to keep the conflict confined to the conventional plane and substantially to the internationally recognized borders of Ukraine – including Crimea.
Certainly unlike the Cold War this time around the theater of operations is on the borders of NATO, and not in Africa, Asia or Latin America, and this obviously increases tensions and risks for Europe, as well as dangerous side effects such as the suspension of Russian participation in the “New Start” treaty on tactical nuclear weapons. But the risk of nuclear escalation or expansion of the conflict remains extremely remote, according to a logic of mutual deterrence consolidated in Russia as in the West for over 70 years.
In conclusion, Russia has no reserve forces or secret weapons to put on the tablewhile each Western military supply to Ukraine is in itself important but not decisive. Peace talks are not around the corner because they mainly depend on the balance of power between the two belligerent countries and their respective political leaderships. The conflict remains confined to the conventional level that is, without nuclear escalation, and NATO continues to stay out of it.
Understanding these elements would help a more realistic public debate on the position of Italy, and of Europe, with respect to a war that has been going on for over a year.
Photo on the cover of EPA/OLEG PETRASYUK