Scenarios for the outcome of Ukraine crisis 2024-2025

This article focuses on the framework and latest background information in formulating realistic scenarios for the outcome of the Ukrainian war. After a short wrap-up of latest military progress and news about build-up of NATO & European postures, there is a presentation of some scenarios for the outcome of the war in Ukraine.

Military SitRep, 1Q 2024

Total troops losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) are amounting up to 650,000 (KIA) plus 1.5 million WIA and MIA. If the West continues to use Ukrainians as cannon fodder in the war against Russia, the slogan “fighting to the last Ukrainian” will materialize. Except for those, who can surrender to the Russians. Zelensky has closed all borders, forced mobilization continues, no one will run away from his death trap. The new head of the Ukrainian army, Oleksandr Syrskyi, is known as “the butcher” by his own troops, and there are fears his aggressive style will lead to even more massive losses for Ukrainians.

The Bloom | Retreat From Bohdanivka | Two Patriots Were Destroyed In Kyiv. MilitarySummary 2024.3.25

The Russians Are Planning An Offensive On Odessa, Kharkov And Zaporozhye. Military Summary 2024.3.26

The Bloom | Ukraine Admits Terror Attacks | Evacuation Of Kharkiv | Military Summary For 2024.03.26 The Russians Destroyed The NATO Command Post In Chasiv Yar. Military Summary And Analysis 2024.03.27

Terror strike in Moscow, 140 died and about 200 injured, March 22

This event has been marked by numerous strange features and “coincidences”. Representatives of Biden administration have been assuring, from the very beginning, that ISIS-K is behind the attack. The first public announcement became only an hour after the incident. How could they know? Soon thereafter all the western media began to play the same mantra: ISIS-K is the culprit.

Speculation has swirled since the terrorist attack over whether ISIS-K was really responsible like the group claimed or if Ukraine’s military-intelligence service GUR orchestrated everything under the cover of its agents posing as members of that group. The Mainstream Media is running with the first scenario while doing their utmost to discredit the second. Anyway, such operation requires wide-range planning, preparing, organizing and financing; in other words, only a professional entity like GUR can carry out such projects.

Within couple of days Russian law enforcement authorities arrested four Tajiks suspected as terrorists and over ten other people were detained. From the outset, Russia suspected Ukrainian connection and the suspicions are proving to be correct. One of the Tajiks, who was captured in the car that was racing towards the Ukrainian border claimed that they were recruited by the curators of a radical Telegram channel just a month ago to carry out the attack using already cached arms in exchange for a debit card payment of around $5000 each.

All four terrorists were trained in one of the camps in Turkey. The preparation for two months took place in Istanbul, the WarGonzo TG channel wrote. As a result of a joint operation by the special services of Russia and Turkey, terrorist training camps have been eliminated in the Istanbul area.

March 26, Aleksandr Bortnikov told reporters that the authorities are currently trying to establish the identity of everyone involved in the attack, both inside and outside Russia. When asked whether the US, Britain and Ukraine could be behind the terrorist attack, the FSB chief responded: “We think that this is so. In any case, we are now talking about the information that we have. This is general information, but they [investigators] also have concrete results.”

NATO countries claimed that ISIS terrorist group was behind the attack but Russian officials, having already gathered a large data, have another version. Yet, there are a number of arguments that cast doubt on Islamists’ involvement in the Crocus tragedy:

  • Firstly, the terrorist attack occurred during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, when such actions are considered unacceptable.
  • Secondly, the detained terrorists were not religious fanatics, nor did they have relevant literature.
  • Thirdly, their motivation, apparently, was to receive monetary rewards in rubles. There were no religious beliefs involved.
  • Fourthly, the target of the attack was a concert center owned by a Muslim of Azerbaijani origin.

On March 31, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that the investigation of the latest terrorist attacks leads to Ukraine. Moscow demanded Kiev to hand over all those involved in the latest terrorist attacks in Russia, including the head of the SBU (Security Service of Ukraine) Vasyl Malyuk. Moscow demanded the Kiev regime to immediately cease any support for terrorist activities and compensate the victims for the damage caused. Zelensky was warned that Kiev’s support for terrorists is being prosecuted by Russian services. Some days ago, the head of the SBU Malyuk proudly admitted Kiev’s involvement in a number of terrorist attacks on Russian territory, including the explosion on the Crimean Bridge, the murder of civilians Daria Fugina, Vladlen Tatarsky, several political figures as well as others persons. From this on, any supporters of the SBU, will also be labeled as terror entities. This may complicate foreign aid for Ukraine.

Air strikes and air defenses

The day after the terrorist attack in Moscow, the AFU carried out a massive combined attack on the Crimean Peninsula. This was actually a worse raid than the Russians could expect to face in the event of a general war with NATO given that not only were a large number of missiles fired but NATO’s reconnaissance and command/control capabilities are fully utilized. As such, the attack could be planned out in great detail.

However, this attack accomplished little to nothing, the actual results were few. Meanwhile, Russia’s air strikes across Ukraine despite the presence of much of NATO’s air defense, were destructive. The obvious conclusion to be drawn is that Russia is capable of both defending against Western missiles and defeating Western air defenses and has the industrial and technological upper hand in the missile war. NATO seems to be panicking over its hypersonic missile gap as well as its inferiority of air defense.

Russia launched Iskander-strike on the NATO Command Post in Chasov Yar and numerous NATO officers died, March 26.

Russian air strike on the Yavorovsky training ground in the Lviv region, March 25. As a result of the strike, about 100 people are known to have been killed or wounded. Some of which, at least 30, are foreign mercenaries from France, Poland, Germany and Britain.

In the night of March 25, Russian drones and missiles struck targets in the Odessa, Mykolaiv, Kherson and Zaporozhzye rear region. In the morning, a surprise attack targeted the capital of Ukraine Kiev. Russia launched a missile attack on the buildings of the GUR and the SBU in the center of Kiev, March 25. This is the first time that a group strike of the RuAF has been carried out against such targets and with hypersonic missiles (Kinzals). There seemed to be a reason for such a speed—there was an underground bunker “decision-making center” in the buildings. It is also reported about the defeat of two Patriot air defense systems at the Kiev Zhuliany airport.

Not only the underground production facilities and the Patriot air defense control center were destroyed but also these premises filled with personnel. Dozens of ambulances were working to evacuate the wounded. CIA, MI6 and various wounded Western foreign military personnel are being flown to Poland by helicopter. The attack was carried out suddenly and at a time when the buildings were full. They say that some meetings were held there. Russia probably monitored the city both with the help of intelligence agents and with the help of UAVs. Russia is now moving directly towards the top figures attacking its own territory. Many high-ranking figures of the SBU, GUR, AFU and other important units were probably eliminated along with their Western curators.

Together, in March 2024, Russia launched about 200 precision air strikes (missiles, drones, glide bombs) around Ukraine, particularly causing severe destruction to energy service sector (power plants, oil and gas stores, network etc.) with wide-range blackouts.

Two More Power Plants Were Destroyed My A Massive Missile Strike. Military Summary For 2024.03.29

The Bloom | Energy Collapse | Most Of The Power Plants Were Destroyed. Military Summary 2024.03.29

Ukrainians Retreat From Pervomaiske | Blackout Of Eastern Ukraine. Military Summary For 2024.03.29 The Bloom | Russian Promotion Along The Entire Donetsk Front | Blackout | Military Summary 2024.3.30

NATO’s posture in the Ukrainian war, NATO’s new buildup and campaign plans

I have collected some prominent articles and videos, made by a group of internationally respected experts.  This collection you find in my previous article, link here: “War in Ukraine: Military SitRep, recent NATO buildup and French campaign

NATO is building its largest military base on Black Sea coast in Romania, as told in my previous article. The new military base should be based on the old 57th Air Base of the Romanian Air Force “Mikhail Kogalniceanu” near port city of Constanta. The construction of the new large military facility on the Black Sea coast is a clear signal to Moscow. The new military base has an area of 2.8 thousand hectares. It should host 10,000 NATO soldiers and their family members on a permanent basis. Base commander Nicolae Cresu said the base would be fully operational in 2040. Today, there are about 3,000 military men stationed at the base.

Recently, several European leaders have made statements about deploying NATO forces to Ukraine. This seems to be not mere rhetoric but a well-structured, political and media plan. Over the last two years, tens of thousands of troops have been deployed near Ukrainian borders. Just a week ago, French President Emmanuel Macron stated that the possibility of Western countries sending troops to Ukraine cannot be dismissed.

Although Germany, Britain, and the United States were quick to distance themselves from this assertion, the French leader not only stood his ground but intensified his stance: “There are no red lines.” If the front in Ukraine moves towards Odessa or Kyiv, Paris may deploy its troops into the country.” Some Western leaders hope that the presence of NATO military personnel in key Ukrainian cities will deter Russian military actions and prevent the occupation of critical Ukrainian cities like Odessa.

In fact, Ukraine can no longer defend itself, the current AFU retreating from all frontlines proves this dismal fact. As previously reported, the Ukrainian army has lost the initiative, leading to a strategy that slows down the inevitable Russian advances. This is precisely why the West will highly likely intervene in Ukraine, especially in Odessa.

The West is not willing to allow Russians to occupy Odessa and turn Ukraine into a landlocked country. This could be the ignition point of a major conflict. According to Russians, the British Secret Intelligence Service MI6 created the so-called Initiative to Guarantee the Independence of Ukraine in 2024. While the details are murky, an intervention plan seems evident.

It’s quite obvious that the question is no longer “if” NATO troops will be sent to Ukraine but “when.” All indications point to an intervention by NATO countries, when Russian troops open the northeast fronts and advance over Zaporozhzye.

It seems that many high-ranking Russian officials and military analysts are discussing a NATO intervention in Ukraine. They are not speculating on a potential intervention but are certain of its occurrence and merely wondering, when it will happen. The might of the Ukrainian army has been merely sufficient to delay Russian advances without achieving a significant victory. Even major weapon deliveries from Western countries are unlikely to alter the outcome, only to delay an inevitable to materialize.

Russian President Vladimir Putin‘s election victory speech and Q&A with the press was full of familiar themes but he used the occasion after capturing a record 87% of the vote to warn the US and Europe that a “full-scale World War III” is “possible” should any Western troops enter Ukraine. The remarks came in response to a journalist’s question on President Macron’s recent statements saying he thinks sending troops to Ukraine should be a realistic possibility.

There is no end in sight in the Russo-Ukrainian war, not even negotiations. Both Russia and Ukraine want to improve their positions before the inevitably upcoming peace negotiations. Russia to get more concessions from Ukraine and Ukraine to avoid too many concessions.

But how will the war finally end? There will be no negotiated peace for now, even though it would probably be the best alternative for Ukraine. The best alternative would of course have been a negotiated settlement during the spring of 2022, but ex- British PM “BoJo” torpedoed it.

According to some prominent military experts, Russian Armed Forces will launch “Big Arrow” offensives April-May in three directions: Odessa-Mykolaev, Zaporizhzia and Kharkiv-Kupyansk region. Another way is that RuAF resume “meat grinding” approach utilizing massively glide bombs (FABs), thermobaric flamethrowers, MLRS & field artillery as well as other heavy weapons, where Russia has a clear competitive edge and superiority.

On the other hand, according to various speculations, NATO may deploy forces from Romania to Odessa region and/or from Poland into Ukraine on the border region of Belarus by this way freeing Ukrainian troops to be sent to the eastern part of Ukraine against Russian forces.

A Swedish military analyst Mikael Valtersson has recently made an accomplished and professional assessment of potential outcomes of Ukraine war: ANALYSIS HOW WILL THE WAR END by Mikael Valtersson, key takeaways; MARCH 11 2024 Part 1/2 and March 11 2024 Part 2/2

The war might be over in a couple of years or continue until 2030. It can also end in a resounding Russian victory or just a minor Russian victory. We now have four different scenarios.

What will happen to Ukraine, in the case of Russian resounding victory.  We can divide Ukraine into four zones. Zone A, Western Ukraine with Lvov and a majority of Ukrainian speakers. Zone B, Central Ukraine with Kiev and a majority of Surzhyk (mix of Ukrainian and Russian) speakers. Zone C, Northeastern Ukraine with Kharkov and a majority of Russian speakers. Zone D, Southeastern and Southern Ukraine with Donetsk and Odessa, a majority of Russian speakers.

Zone D Novorossiya will probably be incorporated into Russia. Five oblasts have already been incorporated, Crimea, Kherson, Zaporozhye, Donetsk and Lugansk. The remaining two along the Black Sea coast; Mykolaiv and Odessa will also be incorporated into Russia. The remaining three zones (ABC) might continue as a united Ukraine with close cooperation with Russia. But there are several alternatives.

After a Russian victory, Russia will control, directly or indirectly, 75% of Ukrainian territory and 50% of its population (~20 million). West Ukraine will have around 25% of the territory and around 20-25% of the population. The remaining 25-30% of the Ukrainian population will be living in exile. Russia will have grown as a result of the war. A new union state or confederation would have more than 185 million inhabitants.

European ambivalent and delusional views

At a Pan Western meeting of nationalist parties, Deputy Prime Minister of Italy Matteo Salvini called French President Emmanuel Macron “a danger” to Europe for his refusal to rule out the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine. Salvini said “I think that President Macron, with his words, represents a danger for our country and our continent.” He added, “I don’t want to leave our children a continent ready to enter World War III”, as backlash against the Western-led war continues to grow in Europe. Some believe that Macron is using Russophobia as a way to bring together a European Union, which is increasingly being split by demands for more national sovereignty.

It appears that European NATO countries are panicking now due to current Russian military success and Ukraine’s huge losses. Apparently, Europe forgot some obvious facts:

  • History confirms that it is logistically impossible to defeat Russia in Russia
  • Ukraine can never defeat Russia in a 1v1 war
  • Western countries readiness for warfare is near-to-zero; lack of general conscription and limited military industry are only two examples of weaknesses
  • Nationalism is at record lows and patriots in the west hate usually their own government more than they hate Russia
  • Europe has been de-industrialized, energy self-sufficiency is low and agriculture in crisis due to climate lunatics
  • The best path to peace is to negotiate but this simple political fact has fully ruled out
  • The idea that the EU could defeat Russia in the attrition war is folly

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, interviewed by CNews

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan : pourquoi je ne serai pas candidat aux européennes

March 26, 2024, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, leader of the Get Up, France political movement, said:

“Peace is possible if Ukraine is demilitarized, if NATO remains in place and does not move forward. And if we understand, in the small minds of Westerners, that this war is the suicide of Europe in the 21st century, playing into the hands of China, making us economically dependent on the United States and giving Islamism strength in our south.

If we don’t understand that there are priorities and choices to be made, then Europe will disappear from history because of an absurd conflict. And what guarantees do you have that Putin will not go ahead? This is insane propaganda! It’s all nonsense. You know, if the United States saw Chinese bases and missiles arriving in Mexico, I think they would react. If France had seen Chinese and Russian bases in Monaco or Wallonia with missiles aimed at Paris, I think we would have reacted.

So, at some point we have to stop this fratricidal conflict between the Slavs, between Christians, we have to look at the real threats. And I am amazed at the lack of historical vision of our leaders, it makes me sympathize with Europe.”

As a symbol of the present EU feelings. This tweet by Alex Christoforou proves the desperate situation of the EU; Borrell is begging the US not to abandon the EU!

Professor John Mearsheimer, Chicago University, has been right all along; Russia wins the war.

Colonel Douglas MacGregor’s short presentation, direct and honest talk about NATO and Ukraine war, MUST SEE VIDEO: Colonel Douglas Macgregor: Redacted 3/25/2024

Some tentative proposed models, how to divide Ukraine between interest parties

Scenarios by the Author of the website

To sum up of various above-mentioned assessments, NATO’s performance and posture appear to be of low-class in many respects, European countries are not seriously prepared for any wide-range or attrition war. Expectations regarding Europe’s new military build-up and campaign look dangerous and even fateful. As said in my article of March 17, it is obvious that the US is withdrawing from the European theater in order to prepare and focus on the Indo-Pacific theater.

In principle, there are three Basic Scenarios:

Scenario 1: Russia loses, Ukraine wins

Scenario 2: “Forever war”; prolonged, frozen conflict, based on the present territorial configuration

Scenario 3: Ukraine loses, Russia wins

Elaboration of scenarios

Scenario 1: Russia loses, Ukraine wins

This scenario is out of realism, only imaginary outcome, because any major nuclear power cannot lose the war. If such a power is in risk to lose, it will utilize maximally nuclear weapons destroying finally the entire humankind.

Scenario 2: “Forever war”; prolonged, frozen conflict, based on the present territorial configuration

This scenario is possible but based on all available data and my own assessment, this seems to be highly unlikely outcome. Here below the key arguments.

AFU have lost so enormously both troops and equipment & material that it cannot maintain the required military capability versus RuAF. The only theoretical way would be a massive military and financial foreign aid from the US and the NATO & the EU. The question is at least of $ 100 – 150 billion finance aid as well as so huge quantities of equipment and material that they simply do not exist in any part of the world. It would take at least 5-6 years to create and build up such production capacity but how to survive those next 5 years before that. Moreover, AFU should hire foreign mercenaries worldwide about 70,000 – 100,000 yearly. MISSION IMPOSSIBLE.

Scenario 3: Ukraine loses, Russia wins

This scenario seems to be a highly likely outcome but there are some variations depending NATO’s actual involvement. Here below the key characteristics.

Variation 1: NATO’s current level or decreasing aid

As stated above, AFU have suffered so enormous losses that the end is near. Besides continuous advance on all frontlines, RuAF have hit systematically Ukrainian energy sector as well as industrial structure, therefore the collapse of AFU is coming soon, by the latest during the Big Push of RuAF in May-June.

Apparently in May, when Zelensky’s position as the president turns into unconstitutional, there will be some kind of regime change in Kiev, maybe even a coup. This means the chaos will take over the Ukrainian society and the final collapse realizes on the frontlines.

Ukraine, as the state, will be partitioned and Russia, as the winner, takes all that see valuable. It is highly likely that all territories east of Dnieper River plus Krivoi Rog, Nikolaev, Odessa and Transnistria. Possibly Poland takes some parts of west Ukraine and Hungary and Romania some small historical parts. Finally, Ukraine will be formed as a poor neutral inland “scrap state”, more or less controlled by Russian military.

Variation 2: Besides moderately increasing aid, NATO sends limited European ground troops (incl. combat troops) to Ukraine.

NATO ground troops can serve as “border guards” on Belarus border, thus freeing Ukrainian troops to the east front against RuAF. NATO can send all the equipment and material now gathered in Poland for this year’s exercise, to Ukraine with some technical advisers. NATO can use its own professional pilots in those F-16 jets, supplied to Ukraine as well as increase the number of “trainers, advisers, technicians, mercenaries” etc. NATO can also deploy limited actual combat troops to take part in direct combats against RuAF.

My judgement on this matter (of limited NATO troops) is following: as long as the level of NATO deployment will be approximately on the present or somewhat higher level, irrespective of their purpose (adviser/combat), Russia focuses on their destruction and these NATO deployments have no real effect on the outcome of the war. Russia wins anyway using furthermore conventional weapons and this will look like “variation 1”. However, the NATO and the EU will suffer political and military losses and will face start of disintegration process, some new European security arrangement will be organized in the negotiation process.

Variation 3: Besides increasing aid, NATO sends large amount of European ground troops incl. combat troops to Ukraine.

BIG QUESTION: Can Euro-NATO deploy the armed forces of at least 50,000 combat troops. If the Euro-NATO is capable to form the armed forces of 50,000 combat troops, the next big question is, where are their weaponry and especially ammo and material and how long they will last. I AM VERY SUSPICIOUS ABOUT THE CAPABILITY OF THE NATO AND THE EU TO WAGE A REAL GREAT POWER WAR.

Anyway, this means a clear escalation of the war. Russia will make a large mobilization recruiting at least 500,000 more soldiers and turns the whole Russian state in the war mode. Russia may also hit targets in other countries than Ukraine.

My judgement on this matter is following: as far as I understand, NATO deployment will be somewhat “limited” in the sense that both the number of combat troops and the quantity of ammo and material do not amount up to “great power level”. Russia can focus on their destruction and these NATO deployments only prolong the final outcome of the war. Russia wins using maximally conventional weapons, hybrid weaponry and striking in many countries and finally this will look like “variation 2”.

At the end of the day, the NATO and the EU will suffer horrible political and military losses and will disintegrate both, the entirely new European security concert will be emerged. Moreover, China has promised robust military support to Russia, if NATO starts direct offensive operation against Russia, in addition the input of Iran and North Korea should also be taken into account.  The New World Order will be formulated by the new power duo Russia & China together with BRICS-block and the US with its allies.

Variation 4: Besides robust increasing aid, NATO sends large amount of American, Canadian and European ground troops incl. combat troops to Ukraine.

In this case, they will meet the united front of Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and a number of other countries. THIS MEANS THE COUNTDOWN OF WORLD WAR III WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS. That is the end of the story.