Although some feed the illusion of a reversal of events in Ukraine, decision-makers know that the possibility of this happening is extremely remote. Carlos Branco, Major General and IPRI-NOVA Investigator

Although some feed the illusion of a reversal of events in Ukraine, decision-makers know that the possibility of this happening is extremely remote. Carlos Branco, Major General and IPRI-NOVA Investigator The withdrawal of Russian forces from Karkhiv and Kherston in the summer of 2022 created the illusion among political elites and some Areopagus commentators that Russia would collapse. The objectives were being achieved. These were moments of triumphalism. However, as we can see today, these opinions were the result of an incorrect assessment of the situation based on false information and biased assumptions. US senators rejoiced that the war in Ukraine was proving to be a great investment. Without American casualties, Washington was managing to destroy half of Russia's military capacity with just 3% of its defense budget. Belief in the possibility of an uprising against Putin, one of the reasons for this war, if not the most important, and for a regime change operation in Moscow, expressed several times by Washington and Kiev, had never been so high. It was the dream of the group of neoconservatives surrounding the Biden Administration. However, the announced and predicted failure of the Ukrainian offensive, in the summer of 2023, brought to light the lack of sustainability of the beliefs fed by propaganda. The optimistic and confident voices in Russia's defeat began to tone down and become silent. Except for the always irreproachable Ursula von der Leyen, who, with out-of-date sound bites, came to say in Davos that Russia had lost 50% of its military capacity. Political developments in Russia and Ukraine have shown that the Biden Administration's strategic calculation, slavishly embraced by Europeans, has completely failed. Instead of what was desired, Putin's popularity increased and the Russian economy did not collapse. On the contrary, it prospered, as reports from several unsuspecting international organizations indicate. Recently, “Newsweek” corroborated these reports, removing any doubts that might still remain. The imposition of sanctions resulted in a fiasco, with Russia finding alternatives to dispose of its hydrocarbons. The G7's attempt to impose a maximum price of $60 per barrel of oil on Russia did not work. Hypocritically, the US broke the sanctions it advocated for so long by purchasing oil directly from Russia, at prices of $74 and $76 per barrel, according to the US Energy Administration. This is associated with the increase in industrial production. In 2023, Russia had an enviable 3.5% increase in GDP. It was with immense perplexity that we heard NATO's highest dignitary Jans Stoltenberg come to recognize, at the recent meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, what very few had been consistently affirming for around two years, and for that reason they were honored with the epithet of Putinists: the West underestimated Russia. This belated conclusion is of immense gravity, as it illustrates the virtual reality in which those in high positions have been living and the devaluation with which Ukrainian lives have been equated. The difficulties faced by the Biden Administration and the Europeans in sustaining the Ukrainian war effort worsened an environment that was beginning to be perceived as unfavorable, and in which there was a reversal of trend. If for Kiev it is still not possible to visualize precisely how the war will end, for the Biden Administration it is beginning to visualize yet another strategic failure. Once again, the White House has fallen victim to the hallucinations of a group of neoconservatives who, in one way or another, continue to cause irreparable damage to the external image of the USA. They did almost everything wrong. To confront China, Biden should have guaranteed Moscow's neutrality, but the neoconservative ideological obsession was stronger than pragmatism. Not only have they brought Moscow closer to Beijing, to the point that today Moscow is preparing to completely cut economic ties with Europe, but they also run the risk of finding themselves involved in two strategic crises, simultaneously, for which they are not prepared, decisively compromising the its global hegemonic ambitions. In the West, particularly in Portugal, there was no shortage of commentators applauding this nonsense. The situation on the ground and the increasing difficulties in supporting the Ukrainian war effort not only caused enormous frustration and despair in the West, but also helped to increase Moscow's confidence. As is becoming increasingly obvious, it is unrealistic to think that it is possible to gather the conditions to carry out a future counter-offensive that could surpass that of 2023. Anyone who entertains this possibility is completely out of touch with reality. Neither the Europeans have the capacity to support it, nor the Ukrainians to carry it out. Kiev is desperately seeking to launch a controversial and unpopular mobilization campaign of 500,000 soldiers during the year 2024. Now, this force does not aim to give offensive capacity to the Ukrainian armed forces, but only to replace the approximately 20,000 monthly casualties, that is, recomplete. In other words, just give them defensive capabilities. On the other hand, the West apparently does not have a plan to prevent the Ukrainian failure that is on the horizon. He seems to be left with discomfort and despair. Instead of facing the facts, we are witnessing a flight forward. Brandish the bogeyman of a third world war. Russia will attack NATO, and they will do so through the Baltic States, which President Biden confused with the Balkans. These alarmist statements aim to create panic among the population and dishonestly conceal the tremendous error in analysis made. There is no consensus regarding the date of this attack. Some speak of one year, others three and still others five to eight. In a relaxed and lighthearted way, UK Defense Minister Grant Shapps stated that we are in a “pre-world war” state. To make the threat more realistic, a German newspaper published a secret document explaining how this operation will take place. Once the thesis of Russian defeat has been discredited, it must be hidden by creating another thesis. The hysteria widens. The chairman of the military committee, Admiral Rob Bauer, clumsily came to scare the Europeans by suggesting that they prepare for the conflict, as if it were tomorrow: “you need water, a radio and a battery-powered flashlight to guarantee that you will survive the first 36 hours . Things like that, simple, but we have to understand that peace is not a given.” In Sweden, for example, alarmist news continues, with statements from the country's highest military dignitary, General Micael Bydén, warning that “all Swedes should be preparing for war.” The expansion of this campaign of fear, in which some diligent commentators participate, based on a false argument – we have to stop Russia now because it will be more difficult in the future – also aims to pressure the obtaining of financial resources to support Ukraine. Despite recent calls, signs of preparation for war are already several years old. The creation of a logistics infrastructure in Europe is not new, as evidenced by, for example, the creation of “Military Mobility” included in the EU's Permanent Structured Cooperation programs in 2018. More recently, Finland made 15 military installations available on its territory for the US to install military units and pre-position military equipment. For its part, Poland made its territory available for the installation of German military bases, for the first time since the Second World War, similar to what they had already announced to do in Lithuania. In the Baltic countries, the railway line with the gauge used in the former Soviet Union is being transformed into the European gauge, a project that could only be completed in 2030. Meanwhile, NATO created a program that it called military Schengen, allowing for Alliance troops to move quickly and unhindered within the European Union. For its part, Romania is rapidly accelerating the construction of a new highway to the border with Ukraine, which could be used to facilitate the movement of military forces in the event of a conflict. It is important to mention that this project, thought of many years ago, gained urgency following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. We have always wondered what the West's response could be if a Ukrainian debacle were to occur. Recent developments begin to point to an answer. Although some feed the illusion of a reversal of events in Ukraine, decision-makers know that the possibility of this happening is extremely remote, as they also know that the next 5/7 years will be one of great geostrategic upheaval, in which emerging powers will seek to take party from the power vacuum created by the ongoing unraveling of the World Order. As has been highlighted by several academics, the possibility that the transition of powers in the international Order involves the use of force by the main actors is extremely high. Furthermore, the Ukrainian theater of operations meets the conditions for such a clash. Regrettably, we witnessed in the public square the furnace pokers, some clearly unprepared, others scandalously industrious. The objective of both groups is clear, to instill in public opinion the inevitability of a large-scale armed conflict, consciously concealing the consequences that a confrontation of this nature could have, namely the upheaval of the whole of Europe. Let's hope that the Steadfast Defender exercise organized by NATO, involving around 90 thousand soldiers, the largest exercise since the end of the cold war, whose general theme is to repel an invasion of force