More than four years after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the war has entered a strange phase. Ukraine remains independent, its government is intact, while Russian forces have suffered
enormous military losses. Yet despite these setbacks, has Vladimir Putin already won the war’s most important battle, that is, convincing the world that Ukraine may never recover all of its territory?
Kyiv recently demonstrated its ability to strike strategic military assets far from the front lines, reminding the world that it remains capable of surprising Russia. Retired US generals recently told CBS News that they believe Ukraine now has the upper hand in the war with Russia.
However, these tactical successes have also highlighted a deeper dilemma — winning battles and winning wars are not always the same thing.
The War That Refuses To End
When Russian troops crossed into Ukraine in February 2022, many expected the conflict to end quickly. Moscow believed Kyiv would fall within days. Instead, the war has become Europe’s largest military conflict since World War II.
Ukraine’s resistance shattered Russia’s initial plans. Ukrainian forces pushed Russian troops away from Kyiv, reclaimed territory in Kharkiv and Kherson, and inflicted heavy losses on the Russian military. Western governments supplied billions of dollars in military aid, advanced weapons systems and financial assistance.
Yet despite years of fighting, neither side has achieved a decisive breakthrough. Russia continues to occupy roughly one-fifth of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, which it annexed in 2014. The front lines have shifted only marginally over the past two years despite intense fighting and enormous casualties.
How Putin Changed The Goalposts
One reason the conflict appears so difficult to resolve is that Russia’s objectives have evolved.
At the beginning of the invasion, Putin appeared to seek regime change in Kyiv and the political subjugation of Ukraine. Those ambitions clearly failed. Ukraine survived, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy remained in power, and NATO emerged more united than many expected. But instead of abandoning the war, the Kremlin adjusted its goals.
Rather than conquering all of Ukraine, Russia increasingly focused on consolidating control over occupied territories and exhausting Ukraine’s capacity to fight. Over time, the Kremlin also began betting on another factor: Western fatigue.
If Russia can hold territory long enough, maintain military pressure and outlast political support for Ukraine in Europe and the US, it could secure many of the gains it sought through negotiation rather than outright military victory.
Why Trump’s Return Changes The Equation
The return of Donald Trump to the White House in January 2025 has added another layer of uncertainty. Throughout the conflict, Trump repeatedly argued that the war should end through negotiations and questioned the long-term sustainability of massive US aid packages. While his administration has not abandoned Ukraine, it has signalled greater interest in pushing both sides towards a settlement. This creates a difficult challenge for Kyiv.
Ukraine’s position has always been based on the principle that its internationally recognised borders must be restored. However, the longer the war continues, the stronger the pressure becomes for a negotiated compromise.
Recent Ukrainian strikes inside Russia have strengthened Kyiv’s argument that it remains capable of imposing costs on Moscow. Some analysts argue these operations provide Trump with leverage by demonstrating that Putin cannot simply wait for Ukraine to collapse.
Others believe that battlefield momentum alone may not be enough to alter the fundamental political reality that many Western governments increasingly want the war to end.
Can Ukraine Still Win?
If victory means preserving Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and democratic system, then Ukraine has already achieved something remarkable. Russia failed to eliminate Ukraine as a state.
A recent open letter by Zelenskyy to Putin, in which he called for direct talks to end the war, stated “when Russia grows tired, changes come”.
Analysts argue that many of the territorial gains claimed by the Kremlin are often little more than temporary advances by small assault units. While Russian troops may briefly enter new areas, they frequently struggle to hold them and are later pushed back by Ukrainian forces.
As a result, the report suggests that Russia is finding it increasingly difficult to convert battlefield advances into lasting territorial gains.
Earlier, Ukrainian military spokesperson Vladyslav Voloshyn said Russia had imposed ammunition restrictions on some artillery units in June after Ukrainian strikes targeted ammunition depots in the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions.
Ukrainian officials say these attacks are disrupting Moscow’s logistics network, making it harder for Russian forces to sustain offensive operations and keep frontline units adequately supplied.
But military experts and leaders acknowledge that fully restoring Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders would require an enormous military effort and sustained Western support over many years.
US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth had earlier said that the US wants to see Ukraine as “sovereign and prosperous”, but that “we must start by recognizing that returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective.” “Chasing this illusionary goal will only prolong the war and cause more suffering,” he added.
Why Europe Is Nervous
A settlement that effectively rewards Russia for occupying territory would raise uncomfortable questions about the international order established after World War II. European leaders fear it could send a message that military force remains a viable way to alter borders.
Countries on NATO’s eastern flank, particularly Poland and the Baltic states, worry that an outcome perceived as a Russian success could embolden future aggression. This is why many European governments remain committed to supporting Ukraine despite growing economic and political pressures at home.
Europe’s faith in the US as a security partner has been shaken. According to the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), trust in Washington has fallen sharply, with many Europeans doubting that the US under Donald Trump would come to Europe’s defence in a crisis. As a result, support is growing for a more autonomous European security architecture, including greater defence spending financed collectively.
Although Europeans continue to back Ukraine’s struggle against Russia, they are less convinced about expanding the European Union further east and remain reluctant to deploy their own troops to help maintain peace after the war.
The war has also reshaped Europe’s energy outlook. Having experienced the consequences of dependence on Russian oil and gas, many Europeans are unwilling to return to those supplies even as energy prices remain a political challenge. Instead, public opinion increasingly favours accelerating investment in renewable energy and reducing strategic vulnerabilities.
What Does This Mean For India?
New Delhi has consistently called for dialogue and diplomacy while maintaining ties with both Moscow and Kyiv. India avoided directly condemning Russia while simultaneously stressing respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity.
In September 2025, India reiterated its call for dialogue and diplomacy to end the conflict, while highlighting the wider economic fallout of the war. New Delhi warned that rising fuel prices and other global disruptions were disproportionately affecting developing nations, leaving much of the Global South to bear the consequences.
As the war enters a potential negotiating phase, India’s position may appear increasingly pragmatic. New Delhi has long argued that the conflict cannot be resolved through military means alone.
At the same time, the war has had significant consequences for India. Russian oil discounts reshaped energy imports, disruptions affected global food and fertiliser markets, and geopolitical divisions complicated international diplomacy.
A recent report by The Hindu said Russia’s share in the value of India’s oil imports jumped back up to an 11-month high of nearly 38% in April 2026. This increasing dependence was accompanied by a 425% jump in the premium being charged by Russia for its oil, in contrast to the discount it had been offering until recently. Russia’s share stood at about 34% in terms of the volume of India’s crude imports in April 2026.
