Following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a bitter debate erupted about war aims or the aims of the Western coalition supporting Ukraine. How should the end-state of the war look and what was achievable? Olaf Scholz, chancellor of Germany at the time, was publicly unwilling to aim for a Ukrainian victory: “Ukraine must not lose” – but how would an end-state look where Kyiv does not lose but does not win either?JOIN US ON TELEGRAMFollow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official. Current Chancellor Friedrich Merz has suggested that Ukraine should give up territories in a possible peace agreement. These snippets from the German debate are symptomatic of a belief in the West that a ceasefire is the only thing that Ukraine could achieve or should seek from the war. Reclaiming the territories conquered by Russia appears unrealistic because the war is at a stalemate. Fear of nuclear escalation has also dampened the appetite for victory, particularly in Washington. Hence, we witnessed a confused narrative after 2022, in which so-called defensive weapons, such as air-defense systems, were delivered to Ukraine without hesitation while the delivery of perceived “offensive weapons” ignited cascades of debate completely detached from reality. For example, the possible delivery of Taurus cruise missiles was portrayed as a “new” or “dangerous” “escalation” even as the Russian Air Force continued to bomb Ukrainian cities with cruise missiles around the clock.