The Russian president thinks he is a better poker player
Vladimir Putin appears closer than ever to achieving his objectives in the war against Ukraine. Despair has settled among Europeans as President Donald Trump disrupts the post-1945 transatlantic alliance, incorrectly assigning blame to Ukraine for the conflict. “You should have never started it,” Trump declared on February 18th from Mar-a-Lago, Florida.
Yet, three years following Putin’s invasion, the definition of “winning” remains ambiguous. The Russian leader’s ambitions are shrouded in mystery. His “special military operation” was orchestrated in secrecy, leaving even his government and the Russian populace in the dark. While Putin speaks of defending Russian sovereignty, the outcomes hinge on factors beyond his control: the political climate in Ukraine, Europe’s rearmament initiatives, and, crucially, Trump.
The American president lacks a coherent strategy, with options ranging from withdrawing support for Ukraine to increasing military aid and sanctions. A significant moment unfolded on February 18th in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, marking the first direct engagement between American and Russian officials in three years. They agreed to initiate vague negotiations concerning Ukraine and “mutual geopolitical interests,” with potential preparations for a Trump-Putin summit possibly occurring before March.
These fluid negotiations play into Putin’s hands. While Trump perceives talks as a means to swiftly resolve what he deems a “ridiculous” war, Putin views them as part of a broader conflict, according to an American official. The Russian leader believes he possesses greater endurance than Ukraine or NATO, the aging Western alliance. Like a seasoned poker player, Putin projects confidence and strength, even as the reality of his position may be less robust than he would like to portray. An end to the war could introduce challenges for him domestically.
The attrition of military equipment is staggering. Russia’s Soviet-era arsenal, built over decades, has seen more than half of its 7,300 tanks in storage disappear. Of those remaining, only 500 can be quickly refurbished. By April, Russia may exhaust its T-80 tank supply. Last year, the country lost double the number of artillery systems compared to the previous two years. Recruiting contract soldiers has become increasingly expensive, and a general mobilization poses significant political risks. Public opinion polls indicate that many Russians wish for the war to conclude.
Despite successfully weathering sanctions due to a competent central bank, high commodity prices, and fiscal stimulus, Russia’s economy faces challenges. The shift of resources from productive sectors to the military has led to double-digit inflation, with interest rates soaring to 21%, the highest in two decades. A chronic labor shortage exacerbates the situation. Economic data reliability is questionable, as the statistics authority frequently revises growth estimates. A leaked report from the Central Bank and the Ministry of Economy warns of a looming recession before inflation stabilizes. Former central bank deputy head Oleg Vyugin advocates for a decision between reducing military expenditure or confronting rampant inflation. The sovereign wealth fund is diminishing, with its liquid assets plummeting from 7.4% of GDP to below 2%. Last year, exports, totaling $417 billion, faced pressure from sanctions and declining commodity prices, with a 20% year-on-year drop in December. Kirill Rogov of Re: Russia, a think tank, argues that sanctions and a gradual price decline in key exports will restrict Russia’s capacity for aggression.
Such vulnerabilities lead some Western observers to believe that now is the worst time for America to propose rapid concessions to the Kremlin. Even if the West cannot provide Ukraine with unassailable security guarantees, it could maintain sanctions to keep Russia in check, Rogov contends. However, Trump remains focused on fulfilling his promise to swiftly end the war rather than on constraining Russia’s long-term ambitions. “We are finally getting Putin into the position where we wanted him to be for three years. It would be a terrible shame if we allow him to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat,” stated an American official.
Putin perceives Trump as not only impatient but also easily manipulated. He has courted the American president with flattery and timely gestures, such as the February 11th release of Marc Fogel, an American citizen detained by Russia since 2021. Despite this, Putin’s fundamental demands remain unchanged: a non-aligned Ukraine with limited military capabilities and no Western troops, recognition of Crimea and four other annexed Ukrainian regions as part of Russia, and a “definitive resolution” that would lift Western sanctions and allow Russia to rebuild its military.
Even if active hostilities cease, Putin will strive to undermine Europe and re-establish Russia’s sphere of influence. His goal is to fracture Ukraine and dismantle the American-led post-1945 order, as articulated by Steve Covington, an advisor to NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe. Putin has claimed that “the entire system of Euro-Atlantic security is crumbling before our eyes,” asserting that Europe is being marginalized and losing its international standing. He likely welcomed remarks by J.D. Vance, America’s vice-president, at the Munich Security Conference, echoing similar sentiments.
Putin’s top priority remains securing his power. Exiting the war presents its own challenges, including the reintegration of hundreds of thousands of soldiers and potential internal strife among competing factions. Trump’s diplomatic overtures have given hope to moderates who have quietly opposed the war. Though lacking political clout, these “beneficiaries of peace”—business leaders, economists, and some technocrats—hope Trump’s engagement can shift Russia’s trajectory. They seek to persuade Putin that easing tensions with the West would enhance, rather than jeopardize, his security.
Conversely, there are the “beneficiaries of war.” If confrontation is the foundation of Putin’s regime, violence and corruption are its glue. Oligarchic clans profit from quotas for exporting oil and other commodities through grey markets created by sanctions. These groups will resist relinquishing their lucrative operations. Meanwhile, security services will be vigilant against both “fifth columnists” who favor peace and ultra-nationalists who would view any agreement as a betrayal.
Trump’s desire to “stop the killing” is valid. A ceasefire that allows Ukraine to rebuild, prompts increased European defense spending, and maintains some sanctions on Russia’s struggling economy could thwart Putin’s ambitions. Nevertheless, Putin is betting that he can outlast Ukraine or maneuver Trump into a deal that reintegrates Russia into the global economy, leaves Ukraine a fractured state, and stuns Europe into paralysis.
