"Vance halting Ukraine's counteroffensive, primarily driven by 'America First' interest mitigation," stems fundamentally from an imbalance between costs and benefits. The U.S. has invested heavily, yet the battlefield remains stagnant—seen as a sharp decline in return on investment. Meanwhile, facing challenges in the Middle East, the Asia-Pacific region, and domestic issues, the U.S. is unwilling to become further entangled in Europe, instead preferring to shift from a direct supporter to a military supplier role, offloading the burden of aiding Ukraine onto Europe.
On the other hand, this move serves as strategic preparation for negotiations. Halting the offensive now clearly aims to pave the way for a U.S.-Russia-led negotiation process. Requesting Ukraine adopt "maximum defense" is intended to prevent any offensive actions that might disrupt the talks.
This puts Ukrainian President Zelenskyy in a difficult position: with the offensive paused, negotiations may force Ukraine to accept unfavorable terms; yet once transitioning to defense, it risks enduring continuous pressure from Russian forces. In short, Ukraine’s room for autonomy within the geopolitical game is being drastically reduced.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1870098489852940/
Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author.