Fyodor Lukyanov, Glenn Diesen: Russia’s Strategy as the World Order Collapses
by Glenn Diesen(opens in new tab)(opens in new tab) [8-15-2026].
Fyodor Lukyanov argues that the Ukraine conflict is now further from a political settlement than it was a year ago. The expectation that a major diplomatic initiative could quickly end the war proved unrealistic. Conflicts of this scale, in his view, tend to require prolonged negotiations, as illustrated by the years of diplomacy that followed the American decision to end the Vietnam War.
In the immediate future, he expects continued fighting and further escalation. Ukraine has increased its ability to conduct long-range strikes deep into Russian territory, prompting Russia to respond with increasingly extensive attacks on critical infrastructure. Neither side, he argues, currently sees a convincing path toward compromise.
He considers Ukraine’s strategy understandable from Kyiv’s perspective: its leadership has an interest in sustaining Western support for as long as possible. He is more puzzled by the European commitment to prolonging the conflict.
Europe and the Russian Threat
He argues that confrontation with Russia has become central to the emerging European political identity. European unity, he suggests, is increasingly organized around the perception of Russia as an immediate security threat. This resembles the Cold War model, when the Soviet threat helped provide a powerful impetus for European integration.
Yet he sees a contradiction in the contemporary presentation of Russia. Russia is simultaneously portrayed as a declining power unable to defeat Ukraine and as a potentially imminent threat to the rest of Europe. In his view, this tension illustrates how the Russian threat has become politically useful within Europe.
There is also a broader geopolitical calculation. Europe’s relative international importance is declining, he argues, as the global distribution of economic and political power changes. Confrontation with Russia provides Europeans with an opportunity to demonstrate international relevance. However, he doubts that this can restore Europe’s former central position in world affairs, because the conflict is fundamentally regional rather than the defining global confrontation Europeans sometimes portray it as.
Russia’s Position in a Global Reshuffle
He argues that Russia’s strategic situation must be understood beyond the European theatre. If the war simply ended with the current battlefield and geopolitical configuration frozen, he believes it would represent a failure for Russia, since Europe’s security landscape has shifted substantially against Moscow since 2021. NATO has been revitalized, additional countries have joined, and Ukraine has become closely integrated with the alliance even without formal membership.
From this perspective, the conflict is part of a much larger restructuring of the international system. Ukraine, Iran and potential conflicts in East Asia are different in their origins, but they can be understood as manifestations of a broader struggle over the future distribution of global power.
Russia’s objective, therefore, is not simply to defeat Ukraine or Europe. It is to strengthen Russia’s position in the international system. The essential requirements are resilience and strength, because the present struggle concerns Russia’s future position in a rapidly changing global order.
Iran and the Lessons of Resistance
The war involving Iran has an important lesson for Russia and other major powers. Iran is considerably weaker militarily than the United States and Israel, yet it has demonstrated that a smaller state can resist a much stronger opponent and inflict significant damage when it is prepared to respond immediately.
The broader lesson is that overwhelming military superiority does not automatically guarantee victory. Modern forms of warfare can favor smaller states, particularly when they are committed to resistance. He believes this will influence how countries prepare for future conflicts and pressure from stronger powers.
For Russia, an Iranian survival that leaves Tehran strengthened in Middle Eastern geopolitics could also create an opportunity to rebuild some of Moscow’s regional influence. Russia’s close relationship with Iran is important, although he distinguishes partnership from alliance, noting that Iran pursues its own interests and does not necessarily share Russia’s priorities.
The Collapse of the Existing Order
He sees little prospect of rebuilding the post-Cold War European security framework. The hostility between Russia and Europe has become too deep, and the conditions that produced the earlier system were historically unique and cannot simply be recreated.
More broadly, he believes the existing international institutions are losing their ability to provide a foundation for the future. The problem is no longer merely that procedures within institutions such as the United Nations need reform. The deeper question is whether their underlying principles can serve as the basis of the next international order.
A new framework may eventually emerge, but he expects it to be global rather than centered on Europe. The present period, in his assessment, is therefore not merely a crisis within the existing order. It is a prolonged transition toward a fundamentally different international constellation.