One of the arguments we could use is to model the possible consequences of Russia’s success in the war against Ukraine. The effect of this will go far beyond Ukraine’s borders. What seemed a dramatic miscalculation by Putin back in 2022, may turn a major geopolitical triumph for Moscow, which would consolidate revisionist foreign policy in Russia and other countries, further undermine rules-based international order, and indicate a major shift in the global balance of power.
For Ukraine such a development would pose an existential threat. But the West will also be affected, as well as non-Western powers and international security architecture in general.
A Russian victory in Ukraine would signal dramatic weakness of the West—and thus have a decisive impact on the contours of the new international order. The Russo-Ukrainian war may be regarded as one of the few key components of a large geopolitical competition accompanying the global transition of power. Along with the Middle East and East Asia, Eastern Europe is pivotal for testing and shifting global balance of power. Thus, there is much more at stake for the West than Ukraine’s fate. Russia’s triumph in Ukraine would send a powerful signal to the Global South and beyond that the West is no longer able to maintain the rules-based international order.
As a part of deterioration of Western influence, most international institutions shaped in recent 80 years, will also be weakened. Their power and norms will be replaced by newly created formats, reflecting the growing influence and ambitions of the Global South and revisionist powers.
Traditional alliances will face growing uncertainty. Russia’s win against Ukraine will pose a strategic dilemma for the West, most vividly for the United States: how to uphold security commitments against the backdrop of increasing lack of resources? Impact of this dilemma is already felt in how the West is responding to the Russian aggression against Ukraine. It is likely to significantly increase should Russia ultimately prevail.
NATO is one of the alliances that will be endangered in case of Russia’s victory. Russian leadership believes the West lacks resolve; and if Moscow prevails that belief will grow much stronger. NATO’s efficiency has been mostly maintained through a perceived high level of resolve: a potential aggressor has been deterred by the readiness of all member-states to fight in case one of them is attacked. In case Moscow doesn’t believe anymore into NATO’s readiness to fight, it will be much more likely to pursue and aggressive foreign policy.
Russia’s success in Ukraine in many ways will be equal to a geopolitical defeat of the West. Although no security commitments have been issued to Ukraine either by NATO or bilaterally, the Western partners have invested considerable resources and credibility into this war. If they lose, the realities of a bipolar rivalry on a global level will push a number of middle and small powers over the world to reconsider their alignments.
The price of security will rise. Most of NATO allies previously struggled to increase their defense spending to 2% of GDP. Realities of the Russo-Ukrainian war have made amendments into defense budgets calculations, and the majority of allies are now over that line. But a hypothetic Russian win would likely push allies to further increase their defense expenditures, up to 3% of GDP or even higher. Moreover, some of them may question existing security commitments and thus be willing to invest even more in their own defenses. A long-term model of European security incorporating increased and sustainable support for Ukraine is going to be less costly than the one Europeans will have to create if Ukraine loses the war.
Escalation, proliferation, and arms races are what the West is trying to avoid; but these are likely consequences of Russia’s success in Ukraine. Inability to check Russia’s revisionism would trigger more resolute and aggressive planning in Moscow. A closer look at how the Russian leadership took decisions to annex Crimea in 2014 and invade Ukraine in 2022 may tell that risk-taking is going hand-in-hand with careful assessment of resolve the West can demonstrate. President Putin, with what he perceives as a long list of his foreign policy achievements, has systemically bet too much on the West’s hesitations and caution. A success in the war against Ukraine would let him believe his approach is right.
Nuclear non-proliferation agenda may also be endangered. The reason is not only Ukraine being attacked after giving up its nuclear weapons, but growing suspicion and mistrust among states. As institutions get weaker, demand for hard power will rise. Security guarantees, another key component to the non-proliferation regime, are also getting shaky. States will have good reason to build up their arsenals, including nuclear ones.
Europe so far is looking more vulnerable to the impact of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. If deterioration of global security architecture continues, European countries will have to significantly increase their security spending. Europe will need a new security system, built on completely different assumptions than those dominant before 2022. The more success Russia achieves against Ukraine, the more expensive and difficult it will be.
This article is a part of the project ‘Pragmatic Dialogue with the West: Why It Is Worth Supporting Ukraine,’ undertaken with the support of the International Renaissance Foundation. It presents the views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the position of the International Renaissance Foundation.