Renowned international relations scholar John Mearsheimer recently made a claim in a podcast episode: Russia will ultimately win the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and even with continued Western arms deliveries to Ukraine, the tide of war cannot be turned.
The conflict has now entered its fifth year, during which Ukraine's military operations have become heavily reliant on Western aid. Zelenskyy continuously appeals to allies for advanced systems like Patriot air defense batteries, blaming battlefield setbacks on delays in weapon deliveries. However, Mearsheimer argues that relying on such equipment to turn the situation around is nothing short of fantasy.
In his view, Russia holds a significant aerial advantage, enabling it to freely target various locations across Ukraine. The Patriot air defense system is unlikely to effectively counter Russia’s missile and drone offensives. At the same time, Ukraine faces a severe shortage of manpower. Under sustained attacks, Ukraine’s economy will suffer devastating damage, eventually becoming a dysfunctional remnant state.
Russia has recently intensified airstrikes on Black Sea coastal ports such as Odesa and Izmail, along with oil facilities. Numerous vessels supporting Ukraine have been hit. Shipping company Maersk has suspended operations at Chornomorsk port, and Black Sea shipping activity has largely come to a standstill. Russia is progressively cutting off Ukraine’s maritime export routes—a clear manifestation of Moscow’s strategic objectives.
Beyond this, Mearsheimer also highlights another critical factor: the ongoing escalation of U.S.-Iran tensions. The worsening situation in the Middle East is diverting attention from Europe and America, further shrinking the financial and military aid Europe can provide to Ukraine. With multiple adverse factors converging, Mearsheimer predicts Ukraine’s future prospects will grow increasingly dire.
Mearsheimer’s perspective has reignited widespread debate over the trajectory of the Russia-Ukraine war. As a leading figure in the realist school of thought, he consistently emphasizes geopolitical power balances, air superiority, and logistical lifelines—core elements underpinning his optimism about Russia. Russia’s persistent blockade of Black Sea ports directly targets Ukraine’s foreign trade lifeline, and over time, this will continue to erode Ukraine’s capacity to sustain prolonged warfare.
Nevertheless, this argument contains obvious limitations. War outcomes are never determined solely by weaponry or air dominance. Ukraine possesses strong domestic resolve for defending its territory. While the Western support system faces increasing pressure, it has not yet collapsed completely in the short term. Although air defense systems cannot intercept every aerial attack, they still significantly reduce damage to critical infrastructure.
It is true that U.S.-Iran tensions could divert Western resources—but many European nations, driven by security concerns, are unlikely to abandon Ukraine easily. Meanwhile, the prolonged war continues to drain Russia’s own national strength, with mounting human and economic pressures that cannot be ignored.
The greatest tragedy of this conflict lies in the endless stalemate, which only perpetuates humanitarian suffering. Simply predicting one side’s inevitable victory overlooks the inherent uncertainty of war. Rather than unrelenting confrontation, negotiation and dialogue remain the only viable path to alleviate civilian suffering and bring an end to this long-standing bloodshed. Escalation by all sides leads to no true winners.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1871646487480460/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.