Nations wage war for many reasons but ultimately fighting is a political act launched as a means to an end. It is also true that the character of war changes the ways wars are fought, as the Prussian general and theorist Claus von Clausewitz observed.
In the Ukraine conflict, the crossover point of those two dimensions has been reached. And US president-elect Donald Trump seems set to take that confrontation to the next stage.
For Ukraine, this moment of truth has been unfolding quite rapidly since early November. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy openly declared last week that Ukraine lacks the ability to restore control of its 1991 borders.
The former Pentagon official Jim Townsend told a meeting in London that Russia’s use of a nuclear-capable missile to attack the Ukrainian city of Dnipro was a message to the incoming Trump administration.
Meanwhile, Russia said on Monday that it hears there's an openness to peace in Mr Trump's circle, something it contrasted with the stance of the outgoing Biden team.
It is possible to discern the contours of Ukraine-Russia ceasefire talks. They seem bound to emerge as Washington's main priority after Mr Trump's inauguration on January 20.
It is impossible to know at this stage whether the fate of a divided Ukraine would be a frozen conflict – of the type that has been seen elsewhere in the former Soviet Union, such as in smaller scale situations in Georgia – or whether we are looking at a much bigger, rigid standstill, like one that was put in place along the Korean Demilitarised Zone line in the 1950s.
One thing is for certain: if a process of talks between Ukraine and Russia takes off in 2025, then that groundwork is being laid now. At the weekend, for instance, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. It is easy to forget there have been talks before. At the very outset of the war, the oligarch Roman Abramovich was involved in talks in Istanbul in March 2022.
Before the launch of the special military operation by the Kremlin almost three years ago, Russia was at the height of a cycle of rearmament. Some of the new weapons that were the product of that process have been integral to the Russian war effort, such as the hypersonic missile fired last week with a range that could reach London.
But whatever happens at the talks table, the world of rearmament is now a permanent feature.
Mr Trump’s nominee for national security adviser Mike Waltz spoke of what he understands the campaign slogan “peace through strength” will mean for the conflict: “We need to restore deterrence, restore peace and get ahead of this escalation ladder, rather than responding to it.”
For Ukraine, this points to what could be called a South Korea outcome of the war. We already know that the US will essentially raise the bar for European defence spending to 3 per cent, practically doubling the current levels. Ukraine has used its legacy Soviet arms infrastructure and technological innovation to provide both defensive and offensive weaponry that have allowed it to resist an army with far more manpower and weaponry.
Nato procurement officials are seeking to gain an innovative edge at a vastly lower cost than Ukraine has been able to show. Despite attacks on its critical infrastructure, most particularly its power lines, Ukraine has kept its production line going for new drones and modified weapons platforms.
Western defence manufacturers have sought to locate production in Ukraine despite the ongoing war. Nato countries are keen to support and tap its expertise and ingenuity.
Mr Zelenskyy in his weekly message thanked Denmark, Norway and Sweden for a new model framework to bolster weapons production in Ukraine. British manufacturer BAE Systems and Germany’s Rheinmetall have agreed to back production for artillery systems in Ukraine and executives have said they are keen to do more.
Efforts in this area are well screened by the fog of war. Setbacks even within the defence production sector in Ukraine have hindered some of the co-operation.
An estimated 80 per cent of Ukraine's energy grid is damaged or destroyed. An attempt by the UK to ensure Ukraine's electricity substations had bunker-like casings failed to take off this year. The finger has been pointed at senior officials for corruptly stopping a project they weren’t involved in.
Once the Trump team get to work, there will be a clamour to provide art-of-the-deal style offers that catch the eye of the White House. For Europe, no matter how many of these deals it can generate, it is unlikely to offset the deal they have at present.
Just as the American dollar has been the reserve currency of the world, the US military has guaranteed European security. Stepping into a world in which that factor has been pulled away is an inevitability. The war in Ukraine has shown Europeans what is at stake.
It has also demonstrated why that the rest of Europe needs Ukraine’s military experience. Through an emulation of the South Korean model, Kyiv can hold its own through the Trump years and beyond.
