The Critical Point is Upon Us
With no viable options to win the War in Ukraine, the course of history will be determined by America's ability to accept reality and adjust accordingly.
For those following the War in Ukraine, it is apparent that Donald Trump is not impressed with President Zelensky or the conflict in general. The Trump administration see's this as Biden's war and believes America's ongoing involvement in Ukraine is leaving our military exposed, especially in Asia, where China, our most serious threat, continues to expand its influence. To be clear, neither President Trump or his administration seeks a military showdown with China, but readiness in the Asia-Pacific theater is seen by many as essential to our national security.
Something else that is equally obvious is that Russia is outperforming expectations on multiple fronts including defense production, industrial capacity, economic resilience, etc. Most strikingly yet not entirely surprising, Russia is also over performing on the diplomatic stage as well. While the Biden Administration and our EU allies embarked on a chaotic, short-sighted policy centered on a forced Ukrainian conflict, Russia has been able to successfully expand global partnerships allowing it to weather over 28,000 economic sanctions.
Additionally, it has now been verified that the United States has been fully in charge of running the war in Ukraine. Reports from The New York Times confirm it, and members of our own government, speaking off the record to me personally, have acknowledged it. The US is financing Ukraine’s war machine, covering nearly all of the country’s operating costs up to and including troop pay, and coordinating (some would even say micro managing) battlefield decisions from a base in Germany. The only thing Ukraine is doing for the war effort is providing the troops.
Take a moment to consider what this war would be like if America had paid foreign mercenaries to do the fighting instead of Ukrainians. It would clearly be a US war against Russia. This is exactly what is happening now with the only difference being that Ukrainians are being paid by America instead of foreign mercenaries.
The US military is providing intelligence, directing strikes inside Russia, managing Ukraine’s battlefield strategy, and funding the entirety of its government. As such, the conflict in Ukraine is not merely a proxy war as some have suggested. This is a full-on hot war between the United States and a nuclear power. The narrative that this is only about Ukrainian sovereignty is being used as the cover for the Collective West’s real objective: toppling Vladimir Putin, extracting Russian resources, and installing new Western-aligned leadership that will sever ties with China.
Despite an extraordinary effort by these NATO aligned nations, the US strategy for Ukraine has failed. President Putin remains in power and Russia has become more self-reliant and more aligned with China.
President Trump recognizes that Biden’s War in Ukraine is a lost cause with no benefits to the US. He has made it clear that the US needs to exit Ukraine and refocus its attention on Asia, where China poses a more substantial threat. To jumpstart this pivot, Trump opened direct communication with President Putin, seeking to normalize relations and address shared concerns. He also appointed Steve Witkoff as a trusted envoy to carry out important diplomacy, and Witkoff and Putin have already met on three occasions.
Trump’s approach to Russia is pragmatic. He respects Putin not out of admiration, but because Putin is a measured, and consistent leader. And this viewpoint isn’t unique to Trump. Most serious world leaders prefer dealing with President Putin over the erratic and ideological leaders that now dominate the Collective West. Outside of NATO aligned nations, much of the world considers Putin a rational and dependable partner.
Still, Trump understands the geopolitical consequences of leaving Ukraine too abruptly. Our allies in Europe, most notably France and the United Kingdom, would be outraged. Moreover, other countries who are also dependent on American military support would likely be spooked. If America is willing to walk away from an ally like Ukraine after investing hundreds of billions of dollars, they may certainly walk away from other countries as well.
Trump is a realist and knows the war in Ukraine is no longer sustainable, under current policy. He believes its time to responsibly acknowledge the reality: this war has not weakened Putin, and it has not strengthened America. Our resources, attention, and leadership must now shift to the Pacific, where the future of global power could be decided.
In his effort to move the conflict toward a peaceful resolution, President Trump pursued several strategic approaches. To keep this discussion focused and pithy, we’ll zero in on the most consequential attempt: a proposed 30-day ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine in mid-March.
This initiative, while ambitious, quickly proved to be a nonstarter as the reality on the ground made it nearly impossible. Russia holds the upper hand militarily and has no strategic incentive to pause its momentum. Meanwhile, Ukraine has a well-documented pattern of violating agreements, which makes Moscow highly skeptical of any temporary halt in hostilities. From the Russian perspective, agreeing to a ceasefire would only give Ukraine a chance to regroup which is something Russian leadership views as unacceptable.
Complicating matters further is the presence of Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the negotiating table. Lavrov, one of the most seasoned diplomats of the modern era, isn’t swayed by rhetoric or pressure. He simply doesn’t sign onto deals that don’t serve Russia’s long-term strategic goals. If the United States genuinely wants a ceasefire, it’s clear that it must accept the general framework laid out by the Russians. That’s the reality of the power dynamic at play.
Despite these obstacles, Trump did manage to secure a limited 30-day ceasefire covering energy infrastructure, starting around March 18. Predictably, Ukrainian forces bombed Russian energy facilities almost immediately after the deal was announced. This gave Russia the moral and arguably legal justification to respond in kind. Yet, rather than take the bait, Moscow held back. Russia understands that any retaliation would be spun as “Russia is violating the ceasefire”, potentially dragging the U.S. deeper into the conflict.
Instead of retaliating, Russia tightened its defenses and let the agreement expire. With Ukraine having clearly violated the terms, Russia now had the justification to walk away and decline any extension. This gave them the diplomatic upper hand. They could now point to Trump’s ceasefire as a failed good-faith effort, sabotaged by Ukraine, and move forward with their campaign.
Time and time again, Russia has shown discipline in both military and diplomatic arenas. They don’t get drawn into emotional reactions, and they rarely make unforced errors. That’s a level of precision and calculation that the Trump administration simply hasn’t experienced before. Although Trump’s team is capable and sharp, the Russians have decades of hardened experience. And in this arena, experience along with an open mind and an understanding of the issues, is everything.
When it comes to future negotiations over Ukraine, Russia will continue to come out ahead. They have time, leverage, and no pressure to rush toward a settlement. Their strategy is simple: grind down Ukraine militarily and wait for a deal that suits them entirely.
Militarily, Russia has been more than competent. From hypersonic missiles to effective use of drones and artillery, they’ve maintained the upper hand and absorbed the West’s best and kept moving forward. Their advances are slow but deliberate. They’ve taken territory, repelled countless offensives, and methodically degraded Ukraine’s military capacity.
What Russia hasn’t done, at least not yet, is break Ukraine’s will to fight. They’ve avoided targeting civilians or decimating infrastructure on a mass scale. That restraint is intentional. Russia sees Ukrainians as their cousins and they don’t want to destroy the country beyond repair. But if a peace agreement is ever going to be reached, that final threshold may need to be crossed.
The unfortunate truth is that Ukraine hasn’t suffered enough to wave the white flag. History shows us that surrender often follows overwhelming devastation. Consider World War II, when it took two nuclear bombs to bring Japan to its knees. One nuclear bomb dropped on civilians wasn’t enough. By that measure, Ukraine simply hasn’t reached the point of no return yet.
And when that time comes, Ukraine will end up with far less than what could have been secured now. More lives will be lost, and the path to peace will come only after immense, avoidable destruction.
As the title suggests, the critical point of this conflict is upon us. Zelensky refuses to compromise. The US, which helped fuel the war, now wants out. And Russia, strategically patient, battle-tested, and holding all the leverage, has no intention of giving anything.
As precarious as all this is, what really makes this moment stand out as critical is the role the Russia-China relationship is now playing. For most of their long histories, Russia and China have been rivals who share a border. But thanks to Joe Biden’s legitimately reckless policy on Ukraine, that’s changed. Instead of toppling Putin, breaking up Russia, and installing a new pro-West, anti-China government, the result has been the opposite: two of the biggest nations on Earth, both nuclear powers, both with massive manufacturing strength, are now, for the first time, united in protecting their interests from the Collective West.
Earlier this month, China’s very capable foreign minister, Wang Yi, spent three days in Moscow meeting with Sergey Lavrov and Vladimir Putin. They discussed obvious issues such as Ukraine, sanctions, the Middle East, etc. However, something unexpected was discussed that should be of particular concern to America. In the official readout of these meetings, Russia said that Lavrov and Yi “also discussed prospects for building a new security entity in Eurasia.” In layman’s terms, Russia and China discussed the formation of a NATO-like alliance between the two nations. The ramifications of this are intensely profound. Suppose, once the war in Ukraine is officially over, Russia and China announce a formal military pact where an attack on one is an attack on both. What would the US do? What could it do?
Keep in mind that President Trump’s entire justification for pulling out of Ukraine is that we need to focus all our resources on China. With China’s rapid military advances and unmatched industrial capacity, U.S. military planners know we likely can’t win a drawn-out war in Asia unless we throw everything we have at it. But what if Russia joins that fight? There’s no scenario where the US can beat both Russia and China at the same time.
If a Russia-China security entity is really being formed, and the Russian readout gives no reason to doubt it, then this moment could go down as the most critical point not just in the Ukraine war, but also as the geopolitical story of this century.
This concludes Part 1 of The Critical Point is Upon Us.
In Part 2, I’ll dive deeper into Trump’s April Ultimatum, the Kellogg peace plan, the root causes of the war, Europe’s delusional armistice proposal, and Russia’s conditions for negotiating a peaceful resolution.
As always, feel free to email me at jonkurpis@protonmail.com with any questions or valuable information.
And lastly, though certainly not least, please consider subscribing to my Substack and recommending it to anyone you think would appreciate it.