Seraphim Dunham Eugine Crane English 1010 July 31, 2023 Analysis of “How the War in Ukraine Ends.” The article “How the War in Ukraine Ends” is an edited transcript of an interview between the author, David Remnick and Stephen Kotkin. Stephen Kotkin is the only source used in the article, however, he is a very strong secondary source. Stephen Kotkin is a historian that has spent most of his career researching and writing about russia, the soviet union, and the general political affairs of eastern europe. David Remnick is an acclaimed American journalist and writer, and has won a Pulitzer Prize, however very little of the content in the article is his own, as he is the interviewer, and for the most part only asks short questions to Stephen Kotkin. This analysis will be going over the strengths, weaknesses, and content of the article as a whole. The article’s main content is Stephen Kotkin’s opinions on the war in Ukraine, and the direction it’s going, and how it may end. The article covers lots of points, from the inspiring resilience of the Ukrainian people and their will to fight, to Russia's military and intelligence capabilities, and the unexpected failures in achieving their objectives. Kotkin also touches upon Europe's adaptability and fortitude in response to the conflict, particularly in reducing their dependence on Russian energy. At the beginning of the article, David Remnick introduces Stephen Kotkin by making reference to an earlier interview they had had at the beginning of the Ukrainian War, aswell as saying, “Kotkin is a top-flight scholar, but his ties to the subject are not limited to the archives and the library. He is well connected in Washington, Moscow, Kyiv, and beyond; his analysis of the war draws on his conversations with sources as well as on his own base of knowledge” (Remnick, How the war in Ukraine ends 2023). This improves the credibility of the article by setting up Stephen Kotkin as a reputable source right at the start of the article, however, the only explicit link to Kotkin’s other work is the previous interview he had had with Remnick. While this is more than acceptable, it would have strengthened their arguments to have provided additional evidence of his expertise. While this does not necessarily weaken the author’s arguments, it was a missed opportunity to create even more credibility for the article, and specifically Kotkin’s opinions throughout the article. Throughout the article, the author employs a mix of Logos, Pathos, and Ethos to strengthen his arguments and appeal to readers. He uses Logos by presenting factual evidence and historical examples given by Kotkin to support his claims about Russia's military strength and the challenges facing Ukraine. For instance, Kotkin references historical wars and geopolitical situations to draw parallels and emphasize potential outcomes. On the Pathos side, Kotkin evokes emotions by discussing the tragic consequences of the war, such as the loss of lives, destruction, and the impact on food security. He also highlights the courage and sacrifice of the Ukrainian people, which creates an emotional connection with readers and inspires empathy. Ethos plays a significant role in the article as Kotkin is an established historian and expert in Russian and Soviet history. His authority and credibility lend weight to his insights and predictions about the war's future trajectory. Additionally, his references to other experts and sources add further credibility to his arguments, though does not directly cite them. There are some points where Kotkin made references to sources that Remnick did in fact cite in order to improve his use of Logos, for example, when they are talking about Putin’s supposed heath crisis, Kotkin says, “The director of the C.I.A., William Burns, publicly announced that there’s no evidence that Putin is sick. Once again, we want it to be true, because we want a shortcut to a Ukrainian victory” (Remnick, How the war in Ukraine ends 2023). While I have removed it from this quote for formatting consistency, the phrase ‘publicly announced’ was hyperlinked to a youtube video of the C.I.A director which backs up what Kotkin was saying. This was a good move on Remnick’s part, as the article was already starving for additional sources, and while the use of this source could have been more explicit, or formally formatted, it still supports the validity of Kotkin’s argument. Furthermore, the article delves into the complexities of the conflict's potential resolution. Kotkin paints a vivid picture of the ongoing war, characterized by a relentless war of attrition. He outlines Ukraine's struggle to maintain its military capabilities, highlighting the stark contrast between the resources available to Russia and those of Ukraine. Kotkin's analysis underscores the importance of industrial production and weaponry in a war of attrition, emphasizing the need for Ukraine to ramp up its production while hindering Russia's resupply efforts. He draws historical parallels, referencing past wars that evolved into battles of industrial production, such as the U.S. efforts during World War Two. An interesting aspect of the article is its exploration of the geopolitical implications of a potential Ukrainian victory. The author suggests that while a complete restoration of Ukrainian territory may not be feasible, the focus should shift towards a future where Ukraine thrives as a member of the European Union. This outcome, Kotkin argues, could be achieved through a combination of territorial gains, reparations, and a robust demilitarized zone. The article engages with the idea of a divided Ukraine, drawing parallels to the divided Berlin and East and West Germany, highlighting the potential for a peaceful coexistence and economic prosperity in a post-war Ukraine. However, the article also raises concerns about the long-term sustainability of the conflict. It questions whether the hostilities could continue indefinitely, given the challenges posed by limited industrial capacity, shifting priorities, and the unpredictability of Russia's actions. The author wrestles with the dilemma of preventing prolonged conflict while supporting Ukraine's aspirations for security and sovereignty. The article thus grapples with the intricacies of achieving a lasting resolution that balances Ukrainian aspirations with geopolitical realities. In conclusion, "How the War in Ukraine Ends" offers a comprehensive analysis of the ongoing conflict through the insights of Stephen Kotkin. The article masterfully employs elements of Logos, Pathos, and Ethos to engage readers, presenting a balanced perspective on the challenges faced by Ukraine and the broader geopolitical implications. While the author establishes Kotkin's credibility and expertise, there is room for further bolstering his credentials by referencing additional scholarly work. Ultimately, the article underscores the urgency of finding a resolution that safeguards Ukraine's future while navigating the complexities of international politics and power dynamics.
