Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has called his recent chat with US President Donald Trump at the Vatican “the best one yet.” The two leaders met briefly on the sidelines of Pope Francis’s funeral in April, discussing US sanctions and Ukraine’s air defense situation.

The timing was crucial for Ukraine. There were growing concerns that the US might pull back support for Kyiv or abandon peace talks altogether. But both sides described the talks as positive – this was their first face-to-face since their tense Oval Office meeting back in February. Following that meeting, Trump openly questioned whether Russia’s President Vladimir Putin was truly interested in peace, signaling that he was growing frustrated with the Russian leader.

“I think it was the best conversation with President Trump we’ve had,” Zelensky told reporters on Friday, with the remarks released on Saturday. “It may have been short, but it was definitely the most substantive.”

Zelensky didn’t go into specifics about the US sanctions, but he did note that Trump’s comments on the issue were “very strong.” He also reiterated his wish to strengthen Ukraine’s air defenses and mentioned to Trump that he hoped to buy American weapons. “I told him the quantity we need, and he said they’d work on it—but these things aren’t free,” Zelensky shared.

The two agreed that a 30-day ceasefire would be a good first step, and Zelensky said they’d be moving in that direction.

On Wednesday, the US and Ukraine signed a major minerals deal, one they’ve been working on since Trump’s return to the White House in January. Zelensky pointed to the Vatican meeting as the turning point, saying he was able to dispel Russian claims that Ukraine wasn’t serious about reaching an agreement with the US. “I’m confident that after our meeting, President Trump sees things a little differently now,” Zelensky said.

Under the new deal, the US and Ukraine will set up a joint investment fund, with the possibility of the US contributing more military aid.

Zelensky also took a shot at Putin’s proposed three-day ceasefire, which Russia said would run from May 8 to May 11. He made it clear that Ukraine is only interested in a longer truce. “We’re ready to move toward a ceasefire as soon as possible – if Russia is ready to make mirror steps. A full silence for at least 30 days would be fair,” Zelensky said in his nightly address on Saturday. “Russia needs to stop the war, stop the assaults, and stop the shelling.”

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov framed the three-day ceasefire as a test of Ukraine’s willingness to seek peace, calling for “clear and definitive statements” from Kyiv.

The dates of Russia’s proposed ceasefire coincide with Russia’s Victory Day on May 9, marking the 80th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany. World leaders like China’s Xi Jinping and Belarus’s Aleksandr Lukashenko are expected to be in Moscow for the occasion.

Zelensky made it clear that Ukraine wasn’t going to play along just to help Putin look good. “We’re not going to create a nice atmosphere for Putin’s exit from isolation on May 9,” he said. He also warned that Kyiv couldn’t be held responsible for anything that happens on Russian soil during the ongoing conflict.

In response, Russia’s foreign ministry accused Zelensky of making a threat.

Russia Would Need Centuries And Tens Of Millions To Capture Ukraine

The fact is that while Russian forces made significant territorial gains in Ukraine in April, capturing approximately 68 square miles of land; however, the cost of these gains has been staggeringly high.

According to a statistician who compiles data primarily from official Ukrainian sources, including Kyiv’s general staff, Russia lost around 4,800 vehicles and sustained over 36,600 casualties, both dead and wounded. Despite the heavy losses, these advances have been strategically important, as Russia continues to expand its territorial control, albeit at an immense human and material cost.

In contrast, Ukrainian losses during the same period were relatively minimal, according to analyst Konrad Muzyka from Rochan Consulting in Poland. This suggests that Ukraine has been able to mount effective defenses, despite the ongoing Russian offensives. As of now, Ukraine spans 233,000 square miles, with approximately 19% of its territory under Russian occupation.

At the current rate of Russian territorial gains and losses, it would take Russia over two centuries, until the year 2256, to capture the entirety of Ukraine. This timeline is based on the rate of territorial capture in April, which, if sustained, would lead to the complete occupation of Ukraine at the devastating cost of 101 million casualties. To put this into perspective, Russia’s current population stands at 144 million, which means that capturing Ukraine would take a toll on Russia’s military that would be nearly impossible to recover from, considering the sheer scale of the losses.

Remarkably, these catastrophic losses haven’t yet completely crippled the Russian military’s capabilities in Ukraine. The Kremlin has managed to adapt to these challenges by equipping its forces with an increasingly eclectic mix of civilian vehicles, ranging from compact cars and scooters to even buses. This unconventional approach underscores the extent of Russia’s logistical struggles and the desperate measures it is taking to sustain its military presence.

In addition to these unconventional tactics, Russia is actively recruiting 30,000 new troops each month, as noted by General Christopher Cavoli, the commander of U.S. Army forces in Europe. This recruitment drive is so effective that, despite the heavy casualties, Russia’s military force in Ukraine is actually growing. According to Cavoli, the current Russian troop strength in Ukraine is around 600,000, almost double the size of the initial invasion force in February 2022. Many of the wounded soldiers are able to return to the frontlines after recovery, contributing to the continued replenishment of Russian forces.

So, how has Russia managed to sustain and even expand its recruitment efforts in the face of such staggering losses?

Two key factors have contributed: money and morale. Record enlistments are driven in part by high signing bonuses and the belief among some Russians that the war will soon come to an end. According to Janis Kluge, deputy head of the Eastern Europe and Eurasia Division at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, the combination of financial incentives and the notion that victory is just around the corner has kept recruitment numbers high.

However, this situation raises questions about how long these factors can be sustained. As General Cavoli pointed out, Russia’s defense budget now accounts for 40% of all government expenditures, the highest level since the Cold War. For comparison, the United States spends only 13% of its federal budget on the military. This sharp increase in military spending has kept the Russian economy on a war footing, with the government prioritizing defense-related industries. Despite the massive casualties, the Russian economy has managed to maintain a relatively low unemployment rate of 2.4%, largely due to the employment generated by defense contracts and wartime production.

Yet, maintaining this level of spending comes at a significant cost. Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov has vowed to continue funding the military effort, even as revenue from energy exports has taken a hit due to falling oil prices and Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian energy infrastructure. In response, President Vladimir Putin has increased personal and corporate taxes and shifted the nation’s economic priorities to favor war industries, a move that is designed to support the military’s needs.

This ongoing commitment to warfare, despite the severe economic and human toll, suggests that Russian leaders are preparing for a long-term confrontation. The Russian regime has transformed its military, economic, and social structures to sustain this war, with the intention of confronting the West for the foreseeable future. According to Cavoli, this restructuring reflects Russia’s strategic objectives, which include not only the conquest of Ukraine but also a broader, long-term challenge to Western influence.

For Russia, the economic and political costs of continuing this war are immense, but there seems to be no sign of retreat. With massive military recruitment, unorthodox strategies, and unwavering political commitment from the Kremlin, the conflict is set to continue, with no clear end in sight. How long can Russia sustain this costly war, and at what cost will it ultimately come to an end?

The Last Bit, 

The war in Ukraine shows no sign of slowing down, with both sides entrenched in a protracted and costly conflict. While Ukraine’s territorial losses have been limited in recent months, Russia’s gains have come at an extraordinary cost, with tens of thousands of casualties and vast material losses. The scale of Russian casualties, along with the ongoing logistical challenges, paints a grim picture of the human toll the war is taking on Russia’s military and population.

Despite this, the Kremlin has managed to sustain and even expand its military presence in Ukraine through unconventional methods, such as using civilian vehicles and recruiting tens of thousands of troops each month. Financial incentives, high signing bonuses, and a morale boosted by hopes for an end to the war have allowed Russia to maintain a steady influx of new recruits. However, the long-term sustainability of this strategy remains uncertain, as the war places enormous strain on Russia’s economy, with military spending accounting for a significant portion of government expenditures.

With no clear end in sight, Russia’s commitment to the war is unwavering. President Vladimir Putin and his regime have restructured Russia’s economy and military to support a prolonged confrontation with Ukraine and, by extension, the West. As the war drags on, it raises difficult questions about how long Russia can endure the economic and human costs, and what the ultimate outcome will be.

The discussions between Ukrainian President Zelensky and US President Trump, though positive, indicate the complexities of the situation. The need for continued support from the US and international community remains critical for Ukraine, but the path to peace is fraught with challenges. The prospect of a ceasefire or lasting peace seems distant as both sides remain entrenched in their positions, and the war shows little indication of de-escalating in the near future.

Ultimately, the question is whether Russia can continue its costly campaign for centuries to come or whether the international community can help bring an end to this devastating conflict before even more lives are lost.