Korybko To CNN: The Ukrainian Conflict’s Outcome Is Still Far From Decided

Andrew Korybko 

One of their leading foreign affairs commentators argued that an infliction point has already supposedly been reached whereby Russia’s strategic defeat is predestined, but upon scrutinizing the claims that they presented in support of that conclusion, it’s clear that this isn’t the case at all

CNN recently published an article by Brett McGurk, who was the Biden Administration’s National Security Council Coordinator on the Middle East-North Africa, declaring that “Russia is losing in Ukraine. Xi has noticed — Trump should too”. The gist is that shifting on-the-ground dynamics, speculative casualty counts, and Ukrainian deep strikes inside Russia have already predestined Russia’s “strategic defeat”. Xi is thus supposedly biding his time on Taiwan and Trump should put more pressure on Putin.

In the order that McGurk made his case, the on-the-ground dynamics first shifted after Russia’s pullback from Kiev shortly after the special operation began as part of the British- and Polish-sabotaged Istanbul peace process, so there’s nothing new in principle about the battlelines moving back and forth. As for his second point, neither side’s estimates of their own and the other’s casualty counts should be taken at face value as is the case in any conflict, nor should their respective partners’ tallies be either.

And finally, Ukraine’s deep strikes inside Russia are a predictable outcome of this protracted conflict after Ukraine received unprecedented levels of military-technical, logistics, and intelligence support from NATO, thus making the gradual evolution of its respective capabilities unsurprising. Taken together, his claim that “Russia is losing in Ukraine” is premised on giving the arguments that he made the benefit of the doubt, which will only be done by those whose preexisting assumptions were confirmed by his piece.

To be fair, similar counterarguments from the Russian side will only be given the benefit of the doubt by those whose preexisting assumptions are also confirmed by them, but there are three objectively existing points for supporters of both sides to keep in mind. The first is that each side, Russia and NATO (which is fighting Russia by proxy via Ukraine), has kept pace with the other’s military-technical advances in an outcome that has thus far maintained their military-strategic balance.

Second, this in turn raises the chances (absent a breakthrough on either side) that the conflict will end through a series of mutual compromises that falls short of each’s respective maximalist goals, especially NATO’s initial one of forcibly expelling Russia by proxy from all of Ukraine’s pre-2014 territory. And lastly, the global processes that were catalyzed by the special operation accelerated multipolarity in ways that are extremely difficult for the US-led West to reverse, thus weakening its antebellum hegemony.

The preceding fact-check and clarification of reality establish the context for assessing whether Trump 2.0 will take him up on his advice to put more pressure on Putin. Judging by the recent scaling down of US forces in Germany and Poland, which follows the National Security and Defense Strategies’ prioritization of the Western Hemisphere and the Indo-Pacific, it’ll likely go unheeded. The US can’t risk a European imbroglio, let alone during its ongoing West Asian one, so McGurk is likely to be disappointed.

All in all, the purpose of his piece was to seed the narrative that Russia is already supposedly defeated so it’s time for the US to “escalate to de-escalate” to finish it off with a strategic victory for Ukraine, while debunking his piece serves to show that the exact outcome of the conflict is far from decided. As was argued, the most likely one is a series of mutual compromises that institutionalizes the new European security architecture that has emerged throughout the conflict, but some surprises might still be in store.

Andrew Korybko, Substack, June 7, 2026 

Anteriores:
France’s “Forward Deterrence” Vis-à-vis Russia Raises The Risk Of Nuclear War 
Zelensky Might Try To Financially Profit From The Romanian Drone Incident 
A New Iron Curtain Is Inevitable 
The Starobelsk Dormitory Bombing Reflects Horribly On Ukraine & Its Western Patrons 
Germany’s Military Patronage Of Ukraine Is A Crucial Part Of Its Grand Strategy 
Trump's Neo-Reagan Doctrine Is Rolling Back Russian Influence Across The World