If he wins, Donald Trump says he could bring about the cessation of hostilities in Ukraine between his election and inauguration. Trump’s peacemaking could trigger a series of seismic geopolitical shocks. Even NATO’s survival might be in doubt.
Read more
At some point there must come a crisis. The G7 and their allies and partners will either have to cease their support for Ukraine as the toll and costs become too great, or decide that the defeat of Russia is of such importance to them collectively that they engage militarily in the conflict.
Read more
Past experience suggests that the postwar outcome in Ukraine could be a destabilised and failing state. Win, lose or stalemate, the postwar environment in Ukraine is likely to pose significant challenges for the EU and NATO.
Read more
The tanks might be a sensible tactical move, although that needs to be seen, but it is a poor strategic and geopolitical step. The Ukrainians have little reason to negotiate now. The NATO allies and partners are locked in and Ukraine’s strategic objective has become the objective of the Europeans and North Americans.
Read more
Putin’s forces might not progress far beyond the Dnieper River. And yet the invasion will reshape the world in which the next Australian government operates.
Read more
Russia’s President Putin rightly bears the greatest moral and legal opprobrium for the appalling death toll, atrocities, and destruction in Ukraine. But once the war reaches its conclusion, retrospectively the contribution of others will come under closer scrutiny.
Read more
Witnesses appearing before the US House of Representatives’ impeachment hearings have connected Russian aggression in Ukraine with US national security. But just how is Ukraine important to the national security of the United States? It may be prudent to have clarity around national interests and to avoid shorthand terms that tend to discourage analysis and articulation of those interests, such as ‘national security’.
Read more