The Russian-Ukrainian conflict has been fighting for several years, and the whole world is tired. Until now, many people are still confused and think what Putin is trying to do? Do you want Ukrainian land? Or should we rebuild a "little Soviet Union"? The recent meeting between Putin and Trump in Alaska was shown. The United States and the West probably were stunned when they heard it. It turned out that after so much trouble, Russia's calculations were completely different from what they thought.
This matter has to start with the four armistice conditions issued by Putin.
First, Ukrainian troops must all withdraw from Donbas. What does this mean? It is not about retreating a few kilometers on the contact line, but about Ukraine completely abandoning its sovereignty claims over Donetsk and Lugansk regions. This is equivalent to telling Zelensky directly and the entire Western world: This place is mine now, you have to recognize it. In the past, everyone still guessed whether Russia wanted to use the occupied land as bargaining chips so that it would be easier to bargain with Ukraine in the future. Now, Putin has no intention of this at all. He is not doing business, he is announcing a fait accompli. It's like two people fighting, one person presses the other on the ground, and then says, "Do you want me to stop? Yes, give me the wallet in my pocket first, and admit that the wallet will be mine in the future." This is not a negotiation, it is a matter of asking the other party to admit defeat completely.
The second, Russian troops can freeze existing contact lines in Zaporozhe and Khlsson. This one sounds like a bit "concession", but if you savor it carefully, it tastes wrong. Russian troops occupy large areas of the two states, including important nuclear power plants and land corridors leading to Crimea. Putin said "freeze", and the subtext was: "I will take this place first, we won't fight for the time being, but you don't want to take it back." This is a trick to "promote talks with fighting." He set the hardest bone, Donbas, as a dead order, and then used the two places of Zaporozhe and Khlsson as "live chess", allowing Ukraine and the West to see a little "hope for peace", but the price of this hope is still to recognize Russia's military occupation. Of course Zelensky didn't do it. He said that at most he could accept the exchange of occupied territories for unoccupied territories, and he was not very interested in this "freeze" plan. Because he knew in his heart that once frozen, it would mean dragging it down indefinitely, and the land would probably not be able to come back.
After talking about this, you may think that Russia’s core demand is land. If you think so, then just take Putin as simple as that. The real big show is the last two.
The third one, Ukraine cannot join NATO. This is the root of the entire conflict and the bottom line that Russia must not give in. Let's turn the time forward. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the United States and NATO swore to Russia, "We will not expand eastward in an inch." What's the result? Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary... five consecutive rounds of expansion eastward, and NATO tanks and cannons almost drove to the door of Russia's living room. For Russia, Ukraine is the last line of defense. Putin made a very straightforward statement at the Oriental Economic Forum: the coup in Ukraine in 2014 overthrew Yanukovych, who opposed joining NATO, and the new government that came to power was all focused on NATO's arms.
It's like your neighbor, sharpening his knife under the walls of your house every day, and wanting to hand over the keys of the door of your yard to a black boss who has never been against you. Can you sleep? Of course, each country has the right to choose its own security method, which is true. But The security of a country must not be based on the absolute insecurity of another country. This is the most basic truth in international relations. Putin used a war to re-shot this truth that had been forgotten by the West for 30 years. What he wants is not a verbal commitment, but a permanent neutrality that is legally binding and guaranteed by the power of reality.
The fourth one, Do not accept the deployment of ground peacekeeping forces in Ukraine by Western countries. This article directly overturned the small abacus of some European countries. You see, countries like France and Poland have been clamoring to send "instructors" and even "peacekeeping troops" into Ukraine. What do they want to do? It is to turn Ukraine into a permanent frontier that restrains Russia. The war is over, but NATO's military influence will remain forever. Putin can see clearly. He said it very clearly that as long as it is a foreign army, no matter if you call it a "volunteer army", "instructor" or "peacekeeping force", in the eyes of Russia, is a legal target for attack.
This is not just a joke. Russia has not yet directly attacked Western military personnel operating in Ukraine, and has given enough face. If Putin is really forced, there will be prisoners of officers from several NATO countries on the battlefield. How do you think the White House and Brussels end? What’s more interesting is that Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov and others added: We do not accept Western forces, but the Five Permanents of the United Nations Security Council, Türkiye and China can come. Look at this trick, you kicked the ball to Ukraine and the West at once, so that you can argue internally. Zelensky was harsh and actually scared. How dare he really let the NATO army come in? Isn’t that the same as asking the gods to come down to earth and open up a second battlefield in his own home?
So you see, if you string these four together, Russia's real purpose will be clear. It is not about annexing the entire Ukraine at all, but about completely breaking the European security pattern dominated by the United States and NATO formed after the Cold War through a controlled military operation. What Putin wants is to take back part of the definition and initiative of "security" from Washington and Brussels.
In the past thirty years, NATO has the final say. It expands wherever it wants. Russia can only protest and warn, but it is useless. Now, Putin told them in the most primitive way: this road cannot be done. I don’t admit the red line you drew; now, I will draw a red line for you.
There are several interesting details in this big game. For example, Russia did not bring much Crimea into this time. Some people think this is Russia is preparing to make concessions? Quite the opposite. Not to mention it, it is because in Russia, Crimea is not a negotiable issue at all. That is the "ballast stone" and the hardest ace in Putin's hands. Zelensky also knew that he told Trump that he could promise not to attack Crimea, but sovereignty could not be given up. This is actually a disguised compromise, because he knows that any attempt to retake Crimea by force may trigger an uncontrollable nuclear crisis.
For example, Russia seems to have let go of Ukraine's accession to the EU this time. In the past, Russia was also very sensitive to this. Why don’t you mention it now? This may be a strategy for Putin. He wanted to separate Ukraine's "military security" and "economic development". It means that if you want to do business with Europe, you can, but I won’t stop you. But you want to pull the European army to deal with me, but there is no way to go. This is to differentiate the relationship between Ukraine and the West, giving the Ukrainians a multiple-choice question: Do you want a peaceful but military neutral future, or should you tie it to NATO's chariot and become a battlefield that will never be peaceful?
After fighting for so long, the situation on the battlefield has actually become very clear. With the support of massive Western military aid, Ukraine can indeed fight and consume the Russian army. But the possibility of strategic counterattack driving all the Russian troops out is slim. The Russian economy was severely sanctioned, but it did not collapse. Its strategic patience is far stronger than the West imagines. Putin now sits firmly in the east and south, controlling most of Ukraine's industrial zones and seaports, holding real bargaining chips in his hand.
In the contrary, the cracks inside the West are becoming more and more obvious. The energy crisis and inflation in Europe have made people in many countries tired of this war. Countries like Hungary have publicly oppose the EU's sanctions policy. Although the United States is still sending weapons, the tone of "never send ground troops" is determined to be very serious. To put it bluntly, the United States wants Ukraine to shed the last drop of blood to drag down Russia, but it is never willing to end up in person. This "agent war" model can cause trouble for Russia, but cannot fundamentally determine the outcome of the war.
After all, Putin's four conditions are like four nails, nailing Russia's bottom line tightly. What he wants is not a decent truce, but to ask the West and Ukraine to accept a brand new strategic reality that is more beneficial to Russia. The reality is: the era of NATO's eastward expansion is over, Ukraine must become a permanent strategic buffer zone, and Russia's core security interests in the Black Sea and Eastern Europe must be respected.
This is undoubtedly cruel to Ukraine. They paid a heavy price for the independence and sovereignty of the country. But the coldness of international politics is that it often talks about right and wrong, but only about strength. When a great power is determined to defend the core interests it recognizes, its determination and willpower cannot be underestimated.
The United States and the West may have really thought that a quick battle and quick decision would make the Kremlin surrender. But they obviously underestimated the resilience of the Russian nation in desperate situations and also underestimated Putin's determination as a strategist. From the beginning, this war was not just a territorial battle between Ukraine, but a fierce game about the future world order. Now, Putin has put his conditions on the top, and his moves are at the critical point of NATO. Next, it depends on whether the United States and Europe choose to accept this bitter fruit that is difficult to swallow, or whether they are ready to continue this gamble. However, no matter how they choose, the suffering of the Ukrainian people is probably far from over.
