Sure, here's the rewritten article with expanded details while maintaining the original meaning:
The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has persisted for over three years now, defying initial expectations of a swift Russian victory. Analysts and observers alike ponder why the Russian military has struggled so persistently.
At its core, the reasons are twofold: battlefield setbacks and external interference. Russian leadership acknowledges that their unilateral efforts are insufficient and must be supplemented with a decisive response to NATO's involvement.
展开剩余91%In recent months, tensions have escalated with increased American and NATO support to Ukraine prompting robust retaliatory measures from Russia. This conflict transcends mere military engagement; it is a global power play where all parties seek strategic advantage.
Since February 2022, when Russian forces first advanced into Ukraine, the hope was for a quick resolution. Yet, as of July 2025, the frontlines in Eastern Ukraine remain fiercely contested. Russian casualties have been significant, with estimates suggesting nearly 200,000 military losses in the first half of 2025 alone, surpassing the combined losses of the previous two years.
The challenges are multifaceted. Russian advances on multiple fronts, such as Kharkiv and Donetsk, are slow and costly, encountering precise Western-supplied weaponry like drones and long-range missiles that target supply lines and command centers, preventing Russian forces from consolidating their efforts.
Economically, Russia's war expenditure has been staggering. Military spending in 2025 exceeds 10% of GDP, leading to rampant inflation, currency devaluation, and hardship for domestic industries. Despite the Central Bank's efforts to stabilize prices through interest rate hikes, economic growth remains stifled.
Economists warn that continued conflict could deplete Russia's oil reserves by 2026, undermining military production. Meanwhile, manpower shortages persist despite expanded conscription efforts, as new recruits lack sufficient training and morale.
In contrast, Ukraine's smaller military, bolstered by NATO training and intelligence, has proven agile in defense. Russia's high attrition rates for tanks and aircraft, exacerbated by sanctions on spare parts, limit their ability to replenish losses. Ultimately, Russia finds itself not incapable of winning but unable to sustain the prolonged attrition.
Key to Ukraine's resilience is the substantial Western assistance beginning in 2022 and escalating by July 2025. The United States initially hesitated under the Trump administration but later intensified support, including the provision of Patriot missile systems, prioritizing Ukraine's defense needs.
Support from countries like Switzerland, delaying deliveries to Ukraine, and contributions from Germany and the UK with missiles and logistical support have significantly bolstered Ukraine's defense capabilities. NATO's aid package includes intelligence sharing and technical support, enabling Ukraine to manufacture its missiles, including the Thunder-2.
Russia contends that NATO's aid effectively constitutes indirect involvement, while NATO insists it is solely for Ukraine's defense. This aid has tilted the balance, frustrating Russia's hopes for a swift resolution.
In response, Russia has escalated its actions. Reports from the Russian Defense Ministry on July 16 detailed five significant strikes on Ukrainian targets using precision weapons and drones, targeting military factories, airports, and fuel depots, resulting in the destruction of thousands of drones and dozens of missiles. Ground offensives have also captured several regions and towns.
President Putin's stance has been unyielding, refusing concessions on Ukraine's demilitarization and neutrality. The Kremlin ridicules NATO's assistance, asserting it prolongs the conflict without altering the outcome. Russia has also emphasized nuclear deterrence, warning against further Western involvement.
Despite Russian naval maneuvers and missile tests in the Black Sea, their response combines military operations with diplomatic pressure to deter perceived NATO manipulation of the conflict dynamics.
Although framed as a Ukraine-Russia conflict, it fundamentally reflects broader Russia-Western geopolitical rivalry. Surveys among Ukrainians show a majority favor negotiation to end the war rather than prolonged conflict. While Russia's economy faces pressure, redirecting oil exports to Asia has sustained cash flow.
Western aid, while crucial, remains limited, with Trump administration emphasizing US interests and fiscal restraint. Ukraine's proposal for peace talks in Turkey on July 23 involving Putin, Trump, and Erdogan met with Russian conditions, stalling negotiations.
Looking ahead, uncertainty looms. If Russia persists in its offensive, casualties could surpass a million by late 2025, while Ukraine, reliant on aid, struggles offensively. Prisoner exchanges and humanitarian gestures persist, but a ceasefire remains elusive.
Russia controls 20% of Ukrainian territory but at a great cost. Discontent with NATO's summit outcomes has led to retaliatory attacks, leaving the situation deadlocked. Ultimately, the conflict hinges on which side can endure longer.
Russia's military predicaments didn't arise overnight. Strategic miscalculations and resource exhaustion have compounded their challenges. While Ukraine's military is smaller, Western support has fortified its defense. NATO's strategic aid has leveled the battlefield, requiring Russia to escalate efforts for success.
Despite Russia's assertive responses, internal pressures are evident. Economists warn that while Russia's military-industrial complex may endure, inflation and business closures worsen. While aid aids Ukraine, the burden of reconstruction weighs heavily, with critical infrastructure damaged.
NATO's aid strategy has shifted. Trump initially suspended aid to highlight negotiations, but after failed talks, aid resumed. This reflects US policy shifts, contingent on negotiation progress. Russia seized on this, intensifying attacks to compel Western concessions.
On July 2, Russian officials claimed victory with US aid suspensions, swiftly contradicted by NATO's cost-sharing, such as Germany's willingness to foot the bill, ensuring sustainable aid.
Long-term, the war benefits neither side. Russia's global influence diminishes, losing markets in the Middle East and the Caucasus. Ukraine faces severe population loss, with eight million refugees displaced.
Peace talks offer a way out, yet significant gaps remain. Russia demands Ukrainian concessions on territory and neutrality, while Ukraine seeks territorial restoration. Trump may push negotiations, but Russia remains skeptical. The massive July 22 airstrikes signaled Russia's resolve: with aid incoming, they will strike back.
发布于：天津市银河配资提示：文章来自网络，不代表本站观点。
