Ukraine will win if it survives: by what criteria it is worth evaluating the outcome of the war

In a short distance, excess expectations are converted into emotional uplift, but on a long distance - inevitably threatens disappointment. The problem is that our country loves these rakes. Which, however, is not surprising. Each time in the election, the Ukrainian voter of all possible political types is looking for a single ballot. And he votes not for the "strongest", not for the "most honest" and not for the "smartest", but for the "magician".

The votes are taken away by the one who offers not the pedestrian route for happiness, but a teleport. And then the election triumph is rapidly losing popularity, because it is unable to fit in it with the designed expectations. And already in the next election of his dream of the second term is hiding a new contender for the role of the miracle worker. This war template did not break the war. Rather, the opposite.

The first month of a full -scale war Ukrainian society was ready to consider the victory to reach the borders on February 24. Then the appetites grew up and the criterion of victory was the release at the turn of 1991. It is difficult to say what that caused. Could be excitement - after the Armed Forces were knocked out by Russians from Kyiv, Chernihiv and Sumy regions. Could be cold anger - after we saw Bucha's tragedy.

One way or another - the next one and a half years of the war, Ukraine was ready to consider only reaching its borders. The exception was those who considered this point intermediate - and was ready to agree no less than the collapse of the Russian Federation. And now the country is faced with the inevitable inside out of any high expectations. The name is frustration. And the thing is not in the legal side of the question. The stolen does not go into the property of the one who stole.

The occupied territories will not cease to belong to Ukraine. The problem is different. If you are ready to consider the only maximum script, it means that for you any other result a priori turns into a loss. If you consider the result of 100%, then 90%the result will turn into a defeat for you. I remember how in the spring of 2023 he said in an interview that victory for me is the preservation of statehood and sovereignty (because you can have the first and not to have the second-as Belarus).

That if the war is paused, it is important to achieve a situation in which a repeat attack will be impossible. And that the liberation of the territories is only a bonus to my hanger. I remember the surprise of the presenter and commentators. My logic was simple. The criterion for success in the war is the disruption of the enemy's plans. If Moscow set itself the task of occupation of Donetsk region, then its fate would determine the winners and defeated by the results of battles.

But it is obvious that Russia's task is to deprive Ukraine of statehood and sovereignty. Therefore, the preservation of one and the other will be the main proof of our victory. While we are in our war, I will continue to adhere to my victory criterion. In the face of explicit inequality of forces, he insure me from neuroses and despair. Because it does not require perceiving the absolute scenario as a single normative.

Even if negotiations begin this year, Moscow will not be so much acknowledged as the consolidation of our vulnerability. It will require our short -sightedness, disarmament and return of Ukraine to its orbit. We are well familiar with this scenario, because this choice was already offered to us. Ten years ago, right after the second Minsk agreements. The position of Russia at the time was that it suggested an agreement every time.

In exchange for the return of formal control over the occupied Donbass, Kyiv had to give up its own sovereignty. Introduce Russian Parliament and give the "DNR" and "LNR" the right to veto key issues. Instead, Ukraine has chosen to remain itself - and a full -scale invasion has become a reaction of Moscow to the failure of its own strategy. Therefore, the victory criterion in the war remains unchanged and ten years later.

If we can preserve statehood and sovereignty, it will be the main proof of losing Moscow. If we can protect from relapse, it will be the final of the confrontation. If we can live, despite Russia, it will become synonymous with victory. Because in the war for destruction with the predominant rival, the victory criterion is quite simple. We win as long as we exist. And you can return and return later. The author expresses a personal opinion that may not coincide with the editorial position.