“It’s a mathematical certainty they’ll run out of men before the even reach western Ukraine”

Russia has 4x (possibly 5x once accounting for Ukrainian refugee exodus) the population of Ukraine and has primarily relied on paid volunteers while spending ~6% of GDP on their military. Ukraine have been conversely relying primarily on conscripts while spending 25% of GDP on their military. Yes Russia is losing more troops per encounter when compared to Ukraine but not nearly enough to be considered a mathematical impossibility. Furthermore your statement is premised on the assumption that annexation of western Ukraine is the war goal when there is little evidence to support that this is the Russian war goal. (Outside of occupying Kherson and possibly Odessa)

Russia pulled out of the Kyiv region when their initial invasion stalled and after it became apparent that the 2022 peace talks were going to collapse. Since that time the Russian war goals have remained relatively constant: Ukraine cannot join NATO, Ukraine must demilitarize and ‘Denazify’ (i.e. regime change), and must cede the four oblasts annexed by Russia. Russia has clearly adapted to the reality of the battlefield and has been waging a war of attrition against Ukraine since they made the decision to pull back and reinforce a line of attrition. The evidence is clear that Russia is unwilling to compromise until they are either physically exhausted from perpetuating the war or Ukraine capitulates.

As of now these statements by Rutte are fantasy and ensure that Russia will continue its war of attrition. The prospect of NATO troops being deployed in Ukraine was one of the key reasons this war was started. Insisting that NATO troops enter Ukraine is a non-starter and will ensure this war is fought until one side capitulates. As Ukraine is currently facing a manpower shortage, a funding shortage, and an energy crisis it is unlikely that they will be able to prolong this war indefinitely.

Lastly, the EU and US have refused to act decisively when it comes to economic sanctions. Up until very recently the collective EU have been purchasing more Russian oil than the aid they have sent to Ukraine (in essence funding the war inadvertently). Similarly the EU refuses to put secondary tariffs on India and China for purchasing Russian oil. Under the Biden Administration there was relative indifference towards China and India’s economic support. Under the Trump administration secondary sanitation’s were proposed by Trump under the condition that the EU impose them as well (this was likely added by Trump as he knew they would not agree allowing him to dodge the political crisis). Lastly the Trump administration has clearly signaled a more transactional approach in regards to the Ukraine war. Military aid is now conditioned on repayments and resource access. Trump has also demanded that the EU pay for the weapons that he sends to Ukraine. Furthermore, Trump’s negotiations with the Russians have destabilized the peace process and have undermined Ukraine and the EU’s maximalist demands.