No one knows how and when the war in Ukraine will end, but Russia is clearly not winning right now.
During the three months of the war against Ukraine, Russia did not achieve any significant victory. But sooner or later the war will end in a ceasefire or a ceasefire.
The American edition of the Wall Street Journal has developed five scenarios for ending the conflict.
The collapse of Russia
The highly motivated, well -armed and tactically efficient Ukrainian forces took advantage of the weakness of the Russian army. The Russians faced poor logistics and coordination of various elements of their campaign. They suffered because of poor equipment and training, and in places because of low morale. According to Western analyzes, with tens of thousands of alleged Russian casualties, their officer corps has seriously weakened.
Most Western analyzes on the war show that Moscow’s Plan B – to focus forces in the east and southeast and expand its hold on the Donbas region – is progressing more slowly than the Russians had expected. For some, Moscow’s apparent plan to surround Ukrainian forces seems unattainable. Meanwhile, long-range M777 howitzers and other weapons entered the battle. According to the Pentagon, these weapons are already changing the situation.
Western intelligence officials noticed a significant refusal to participate in battles with Russian troops. They also claim that Russian units defeated in the Battle of Kyiv were thrown into battle again, often with untrained recruits. British military intelligence says the use of auxiliaries such as fighters from Chechnya has made it difficult for Russia to coordinate forces.
“I think the scenario that is probably somewhat underestimated is the possibility of a real collapse of Russia,” said Eliot Cohen of the bipartisan think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. This may include widespread refusal to join the fight, unauthorized absence, or improper retreat.
Even less serious consequences could affect Moscow, Cohen said. “I think, on some basic level, Putin has been defeated. Personally, I find it hard to imagine that he will remain in power for a very long time,” he said.
Defeat of Ukraine
Publicly available information suggests that the loss and damage to Ukrainian army equipment is also significant, but Western estimates suggest that the losses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces are only a small fraction of those suffered by the Russia, which, according to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, by the end of March had killed, wounded or 40,000 troops had been captured.
Michael Clarke, former director of the Royal United Services Institute, a London -based security think tank, said President Biden’s request for $ 33 billion in long -term military assistance to Congress was a signal that “he will do whatever it takes to ensure that Ukraine is not dying, “which greatly reduces the likelihood of beating Ukraine.”
“I don’t think Ukraine’s collapse is likely. I’m almost excluded. They have motivation and momentum,” said Friedman of King’s College London.
Dead end
Wars often break out in uncertain situations where neither side dares to lose. Western officials have warned that the conflict could continue next year or longer.
“War is often, or may be, a process of collapse because of struggle, with victory going to the side that is still on its feet, even if both sides are suffering so much. That is exactly what happened in 1918,” he said. said Cohen, referring to the end of the First World War.
A stalemate is possible, he said, if you really think the Russians are well-dug and patient and can find compensation for the enormous losses they have suffered, but that seems unbelievable. A more likely scenario, Cohen said, is that Ukrainians will use their mobility and tactical prowess to select areas to attack and enter Russian positions.
Some analysts expect that if Ukraine can suppress Russia’s current offensive in the Donbas, Ukrainians will intensify their counter-offensive in the next few weeks, which will begin a critical phase of the war. Clarke said Russia’s army is too small to achieve even its limited goals in Ukraine.
In the longer term, for Moscow, the main question is whether recruitment efforts will bear fruit and whether another 150,000-180,000 troops can be added to the standing army. Due to the need for training, recruits will not come to the battlefield until the end of the year. “If next year the Russians can have a larger mobilized force, then we will face a stalemate scenario,” he said.
Offensive of the Ukrainian
At this stage, Western weapons are paramount, analysts say. A senior Pentagon official said on Monday, May 16, that according to the Ukraine report, 74 of the 90 M777 artillery supplied by the U.S. to Ukraine were in forward positions around Kharkiv and elsewhere.
This long range of howitzers allowed Ukrainians to attack Russian troops without approaching them. Ukraine is also receiving other equipment in the West, including the Switchblade and Phoenix Ghost drones.
If the Ukrainians move forward, the next question is where will they stop. The lowest target for Ukraine is the lines of control on February 23, the day before Russia’s invasion. It will leave two enclaves in the Donbas and Crimea, which it merged in 2014, under Moscow’s control.
Analysts say if the Ukrainians succeed, the closure will be a political issue for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. There will be a temptation to push the Russians back even more.
Offensive operations are more complex than defensive ones. Pushing into places where the Russians have long been buried, in the Donbass and especially in the Crimea, a huge reward for Russian President Vladimir Putin, would be ambitious for Ukraine. External pressure on Zelensky, especially from Europeans, to limit development is likely to intensify.
Nuclear weapons
Much of the discussion in the West, especially in Europe at the start of the war, has been about giving Putin a chance to change his strategy. Some analysts now worry that if Russia’s leader is cornered, he will fight back and escalate the fight, for example by using tactical nuclear or chemical weapons on the battlefield.
Western analysts say this is possible, but unlikely. Even if tactical nuclear weapons were used, the fighting would not automatically escalate to an exchange of intercontinental ballistic missiles between Russia and the West.
Russia’s use of nuclear weapons would break the ban against their use in the war that has been in place since 1945. The reaction would be appropriate, Cohen said: “I suppose if Putin really went that far, he would see his direct subordinates evading his commands. “
The use of such weapons will draw widespread international condemnation and is likely to lead to further isolation of Russia’s economy, including the potential imposition of so -called secondary sanctions that will target not only Russian businesses but any company doing business in Russia.
Analysts say that the main factor against the use of such weapons is that they will not give an advantage in combat – in a situation where both sides are close to each other and where there is no large -scale concentration of Ukrainian forces.
Source: korrespondent
I am David Wyatt, a professional writer and journalist for Buna Times. I specialize in the world section of news coverage, where I bring to light stories and issues that affect us globally. As a graduate of Journalism, I have always had the passion to spread knowledge through writing.