After 100 days of war, Russia may be in Ukraine to stay
https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2022-06-03/russia-occupy-ukraine-after-100-days-war
When Russian President Vladimir Putin sent troops into Ukraine in late February, he vowed that Russia would not occupy its neighbor. But as the invasion reached its 100th day on Friday, Russia seems increasingly unlikely to relinquish the territory it has taken in the war.
The ruble is now an official currency in the southern Kherson region, alongside the Ukrainian hryvnia. Residents there and in Russian-controlled parts of the Zaporizhzhia region are being offered Russian passports. The Kremlin-installed administrations in both regions have discussed plans to become part of Russia.
The Moscow-backed leaders of separatist areas in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region, which is mostly Russian-speaking, have shared similar intentions. Putin recognized the separatists’ self-proclaimed republics as independent states two days before launching the invasion. Fighting has intensified in Ukraine’s east as Russia seeks to “liberate” all of the Donbas.
The Kremlin has largely kept mum about its plans for the cities, towns and villages it has bombarded with missiles, encircled and finally captured.
.....Annexing more land from Ukraine was never the main goal of the invasion, but Russia is unlikely to let go of its military gains, according to political analysts.
“Of course [Russia] intends to stay,” said Andrei Kolesnikov, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. From Russia’s perspective, he added, “it’s a pity to give away what has been occupied, even if it was not part of the original plan.”
How should a potential large food shortage be addressed with the ongoing war still looking like a bloody stalemate?
Another reason to put on a full-court press for a deal between Ukraine and Russia. And time to do it publicly.
The parts of the article you quote completely echo the usual and perspectives that western European and American observers and experts continue to make. They are in stark contrast to analyses from eastern European experts.
I also find it quite embarrassing when articles in western media still just repeat what's coming out of Moscow or speculate about the goals of the invasion based on what was said immediately prior or since the invasion (which is all so inconsistent that that alone should already completely disqualify it), when the real ambitions of Putin's regime had already been laid out in much more detail not only in writing (e.g. several "essays" written by Putin himself over the last 15 years or so), but also in action.
To your points, the war is not a stalemate in any way, shape or form. There's a lot of dynamic in the battles, as just proven today in Severodonetsk, where Ukrainian forces seem to have tricked the Russian forces into stretching beyond the point where they can logistically support themselves and they are now retaking the territories. Despite some meager successes by Russians (which again seem to be only short-lived), Ukraine is still defending its territory quite successfully, is able to go on the offensive in other areas, and is still expecting lots of weaponry that can further turn the tide. They have a realistic chance of getting Russia off its territory entirely, i.e. including all of Donetsk and Crimea.
Ukraine is under no obligation to enter into any deal for anyone else's sake. Food shortages must be addressed by making demands of the aggressor, Russia. Not of Ukraine. And not of "both sides". Russia must be called on a daily basis to withdraw from Ukraine (completely), and ensure that cargo ships can safely leave the port of Odesa and sail out of the Black Sea. Knowing that this is not going to happen, the proper steps would therefore also be to create a task force within the World Food Programme that is to stockpile wheat and other essential food commodities and coordinate the distribution of these.
If you ask anyone east of Germany whether they believe Ukraine entering into such a deal would mean peace and calm, they will tell you that on the contrary, all it means is for them to look to a future of fear. Especially if their country is not a NATO member, but even if they are. No one is under any illusion, if the Russian forces aren't decisively stopped here, their future is in jeopardy.
