Three scenarios for Ukraines future

10. Oktober 2025

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/content-series/inflection-points/dispatch-from-ukraine-the-path-to-a-durable-peace-is-emerging/

War, war and, oh yes, war.

Ukrai­ni­ans know that a com­ple­te and just vic­to­ry in this war is impos­si­ble for the moment.

[…]

That lea­ves three more rea­listic pos­si­bi­li­ties. The least desi­ra­ble is an exten­ded war of attri­ti­on, which would favor Rus­sia given its lar­ger popu­la­ti­on, mili­ta­ry, and manu­fac­tu­ring base. Near­ly as bad is what Ukrai­ni­an offi­cials call a “fake peace,” in which Rus­sia stops the figh­t­ing for a time but under con­di­ti­ons that fail to secu­re Ukrai­ne or pre­vent a future attack. The best out­co­me among plau­si­ble sce­n­a­ri­os is a fair and dura­ble peace with some Ukrai­ni­an ter­ri­to­ry lost for now but [retain ever­ything in 10 years!] Euro­pean mili­ta­ry boots on the ground, an Ame­ri­can secu­ri­ty back­stop, and an acce­le­ra­ted path to EU mem­bers­hip for Ukrai­ne. [Are we still tal­king about ending the war, or Ukrai­nes wed­ding trip plans?]

There’s a sen­se in Ukrai­ne that the third sce­n­a­rio is more likely today than it was at the begin­ning of this year, when the Trump admi­nis­tra­ti­on appeared ambi­va­lent about Ukraine’s fate and Euro­pean inat­ten­ti­on end­an­ge­red the country’s future. For now, US Pre­si­dent Donald Trump has begun sup­por­ting Ukrai­ne more. And Euro­pe has expe­ri­en­ced what Atlan­tic Coun­cil non­re­si­dent seni­or fel­low Oksa­na Nechy­po­ren­ko descri­bes to me as an “awa­ke­n­ing” about its own secu­ri­ty perils, which “has brought Ukrai­ne a second wind” of mili­ta­ry, poli­ti­cal, and finan­cial sup­port, inclu­ding addi­tio­nal sanc­tions on Russia.

src: click

with Selen­skyj - the peace president.

Also - the “best sce­n­a­rio” requi­res the lon­gest stretch of war ahead.

Depen­ding on if Cri­mea can be “lost” for 99 years. Seles­kyj says never.

Depen­ding on if the Don­bas can be “lost” for 50 years. Selen­skyj says never.

So now bri­l­i­ant Selen­skyj plan comes into play. Have west bankrupt rus­si­an eco­no­my, so rus­sia has to accept “fair” goal of give ever­ything back in ten years.

Ten years which Selen­skyj needs to repro­gram cri­me­an peop­le, that for some rea­son now have rus­si­an pass­ports. This he cant sol­ve in less than ten years.

The rest in Selen­skyj plan is sol­ved by joint US and EU mili­ta­ry and eco­no­mic inter­ven­ti­on. As always, just much, much more.

You know the nor­mal way wars are won. Suck so long on the hege­mons dick until, …

So now we fight for lon­ger to poten­ti­al­ly redu­ce that 50 year peri­od to 10. And get Cri­mea back.

Or have rus­sia reach its mini­mal war goals, say FUCK YOU to the collec­ti­ve west and go for sce­n­a­rio two.

Which cur­r­ent­ly does seem like the likeliest mid term scenario.

Also - less war that way.

To which the ent­i­re west says - yes, but more poten­ti­al for future war!

So west needs “just peace” - which is of cour­se achie­ved by threa­tening AND bankrup­t­ing rus­sia - oh and ste­aling all of its wes­tern ban­ked money:

Though Trump didn’t use the term “sanc­tions,” he told his Ukrai­ni­an coun­ter­parts that he favo­r­ed puni­ti­ve tariffs and restric­ti­ve eco­no­mic mea­su­res against Putin to push him to more rapidly and wil­lin­g­ly nego­tia­te peace. The­se mea­su­res inclu­de actions against Russia’s big ener­gy com­pa­nies and, tog­e­ther with Euro­pe, against coun­tries such as India and Chi­na, which are purcha­sing Rus­si­an oil and thus sup­por­ting the Rus­si­an economy.

Yeah. Yeah, right. Ukrai­ni­an US Lob­by working hard. You can do it!

Quick, we need more tech­no­bab­b­le so peop­le belie­ve in glo­rious con­cept of long war, that is also fast!

No choice but to press on—and fast

One of the stron­gest impres­si­ons I got on the ground in Ukrai­ne is that the war is now cha­rac­te­ri­zed more by a tech­no­lo­gy race than a batt­le for ter­ri­to­ry, though one informs the other. The advan­ced dro­ne tech­no­lo­gy that both sides are employ­ing is incre­a­sing the ever-expanding width of the “kill zone” on the front lines—the area wit­hin which sol­di­ers can’t sur­vi­ve and tanks can’t tra­vel without being destroyed—to twen­ty kilo­me­ters or more.

We’re expe­ri­en­cing ano­t­her revo­lu­ti­on in mili­ta­ry affairs,” Andriy Zago­rod­nyuk, Ukraine’s for­mer minis­ter of defen­se and a dis­tin­guis­hed fel­low at the Atlan­tic Council’s Eura­sia Cen­ter, tells me. “Vic­to­ry will go to the side that comes up with solu­ti­ons fas­ter. The goal of our tech­no­lo­gy eco­sys­tem is to evol­ve fas­ter than the enemy,” and hence bring about Russia’s “func­tio­n­al defeat through stra­te­gic neu­tra­liz­a­ti­on of Rus­si­an capa­bi­li­ties.” In short, he says, the war pri­ma­ri­ly has beco­me one more against time than for territory. 

And most peop­le in my coun­try still belie­ve Selen­skyj is the peace president.

Becau­se of gre­at media descrip­tor “just peace”.









Hinterlasse eine Antwort