You think that a defeated country can annex territory?? When has this ever happened in history?
Many countries in stalemate managed to conquer territories despite no conclusive victory.
Exemples:
Taiwan, US invasion of Iraq, South Korea, Kosovo, hundreds of European wars.
Exchanging territories is normal in wars but is not a guarantee of victory. Having territory is a necessary condition, but not sufficient to guarantee a decisive victory.
You avoided my example asking if it's considered a defeat if I failed to capture a terrorist leader or dictator but ended up annexing his entire territory into mine instead. This suggests that you indeed consider that a defeat.
Yes, you will be defeated if you cannot defeat your enemy.
If you declare a war on drugs or a war on terrorism and fail to exterminate drug traffickers and terrorists, even within your own territory or abroad, you lose the war. Implies continuing to suffer losses.
Just like Mexico, Brazil and the USA are losing the war on drugs.
But there is the possibility of stalemate, when neither side wins and they reach an agreement.
The Yakuza in Japan and the mafia in Italy are examples of stalemate in the war on drugs.
If Putin says that Ukraine is now a Nazi state and promises to de-zanify Ukraine, if he doesn't de-zanify Ukraine he will lose.
But it will be a stalemate if Putin manages to at least seize most of Ukraine and concessions from Zelensky. Both sides will concede and make a deal, so neither will be the ultimate winner.
Actually, Ukraine stated that there will be no negotiations and no conclusion to the war until every inch of Ukrainian land is returned and every invader killed dead in the Ukrainian dirt. I'd say that's a major stated objective failed. Zelensky doesn't even dare say it again anymore. Now he says peace is most important.
As I said above, if both Zelesnsky and Putin are conceding their initial demands in the negotiations, neither is a winner. Stalemate.
Both can declare victory or defeat, but neither has achieved a universally recognized victory. So this is the typical inconclusive war.
No. China/Russia have different mentality from Europe. When we are challenged, we always emerge stronger because our national culture is to always rely on our own power. But that is not European culture. Once Europe adopted the pack rat mentality by creating the EU and NATO, their culture has always been to look for others in the group to solve the problem. They will host endless meetings about this with announcements every time but in the end come up empty. Nobody will take responsibility and rise but always look for others to solve the problem, only jumping in when the path to victory is clear. "If it's everyone's responsibility, it becomes no one's responsibility." People with pack rat mentality do not improve when challenged.
What you say has no evidence.
You are just underestimating your enemy. This is a gross error.
However, there is actually evidence in history that the Western mentality can overcome the Russian/Chinese mentality.
Who guarantees that a new revolution will not make Russia unstable again? Or who guarantees that a new alliance of Western countries will not partition China again?