In an interview with the website of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations, Afifeh Abedi stated that basically the West encouraged Russia to attack Ukraine by creating the necessary background to turn the war into a quagmire for Russia, adding: One of the possible hypotheses from the beginning was that all provocative movements of the West in Ukraine against Russia’s warnings are aimed at igniting the fire of war, which will lead to the political, military and economic weakening of Russia.
He added: The war in Ukraine, like all other asymmetric wars, and turning into an urban and guerrilla war, is a potentially long war. The non-entry of the West into a direct war with Russia in Ukraine was also aimed at keeping the crisis at the same level with long-term strategic goals.
The researcher of the Research Center of the Expediency Council pointed to the holding of a conference on aid to Ukraine in Copenhagen, in which Western countries pledged to send 1.5 billion euros in military aid to Ukraine, and said: This conference should be held in continuation of Washington’s efforts and initiatives to share costs of war between the United States and Europe. Although the US and Europe are at different levels in terms of vulnerability to Russia and the consequences of the war in Ukraine, they agree on the issue of feeling being threatened by Russia and the need to weaken it.
Abedi, saying that conferences similar to the Copenhagen conference will probably be held in the future and that the financial and weaponry costs will be shared between the Western parties, noted: This cost will not necessarily be managed according to the plan of Washington and Brussels, and there is no guarantee that they will be decisive; because due to the fragmentation and dispersion of groups in Ukraine, the expenses may not be in the direction that the founders want, but it will help to provide the complicated and long-term goal of Ukraine war for Russia.
She continued: The conflict between the West and Russia is going on in the political, military and economic arenas, and the weakening of Russia in the Ukraine war is the objective that the West is pursuing. In fact, a distinction should be made between areas, objectives and motivations at different levels and layers with a short, medium and long term perspective.
The analyst of Russian affairs pointed to the Ukrainian president’s hope that the battlefield will change by the fall and said: The war in Ukraine is an asymmetric war, and the probability that its outcome will be determined on the battlefield is very low. Probably, Zelensky made such a promise with confidence in the support of the West, but it should be remembered that the support of Europe in particular faces a lot of uncertainty in the cold seasons and intensification of the energy crisis.
Abedi considered escalation of the war in the remaining days of summer with an aim of weakening Russia in the field, as strengthening Europe in possible gas negotiations in the fall and winter, and said: Europe has to solve the energy crisis in the cold season, and Russia, due to its dependence on the European market, is trying to remove part of the sanctions through energy, therefore, there will be flexibility on the negotiating table from both sides.

US attempt to engineer regime change in Russia
Regarding the analysis of some American experts that Biden is using the war in Ukraine to engineer “regime change in Russia”, Abedi noted: The West’s attempt to change the regime in Russia and weaken the position of Putin and his party is a long-term plan and has been in place for the past two decades and will continue. Dragging Russia into a war with Ukraine, imposing costs on it and weakening the country’s political economy was one of the West’s plans. At the same time, it should be kept in mind that the Ukraine war and Russia’s foreign policy are based on the “strategic culture” of that country, and Putin follows that strategic culture, which has centuries-old roots in Russia and is accompanied by domestic support.
Saying that such domestic support for Russia’s foreign policy will continue, she added: The Ukraine war and Russia’s position in the war and in the international environment are subject to many variables, drivers and uncertainties that cannot be easily predicted. It can only be considered that in the short term, Putin’s position is still stable and will have domestic support, but in the medium term, there is no picture available of this trend changing.
Abedi pointed to the Russian military expert’s criticism of the weakness of the army, the oldness of Russia’s weaponry and the possibility of the country’s defeat in the war and said: asymmetric wars, of which the Ukraine war is an example, are subject to different military, economic, political and social levels. Russia entered the war with the social support it had in eastern Ukraine, and this support is still there. On the other hand, the West was not ready to go directly into the war with Russia.
Recalling that Russia is the second military power in the world in terms of quantity and quality, she added: In military, political and social terms, Russia will fight this war without an equal rival. The war in Ukraine will not end easily in the field, unless Russia unilaterally decides to withdraw from the war like the historical model of the Soviet war in Afghanistan, which is an unlikely scenario.
The researcher continued: In the end, the fate of the war will be determined at the negotiating table. Therefore, the probability of a scenario that states that Russia will lose the war and withdraw from it is low.
According to Abedi; it is possible that in future trends, the importance of the Ukraine war for the West will be reduced and its focus will be on other issues, and conditions will be provided for Russia that it could advance its geopolitical goals in other conditions.