CNN lists five scenarios for the end of the Ukraine war. None of them are good for Kyiv.

CNN lists five different scenarios for the end of the Ukraine war, each with varying degrees of credibility. One scenario is that everything ends at the negotiation table, while another sees the dust settle on the battlefield. However, for Ukraine, none of the options are good.

CNN commentator Nick-Paton Walsh listed five possible scenarios for the end of the Ukraine war, which could be realized after Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with US President Donald Trump.

Walsh acknowledges the current basic situation.

On the Russian side, despite the difficulties caused by sanctions, they are steadily winning on the battlefield. Therefore, Russia's interest is not in seeking compromise, but in continuing to advance to achieve its goals, as the Ukrainian front is about to collapse.

On the American side, Trump wants to end the conflict so that he can focus all attention on China and domestic issues in the United States. But he has no real means to pressure Moscow.

On the European side, Europe hopes to "fight against Russia in Ukraine" for as long as possible, as it believes it is better than fighting against Russia on its own doorstep.

First scenario - Russia agrees to an unconditional ceasefire.

Walsh believes this scenario is unlikely, as there is no benefit for the Russian army to pause military operations. They are currently at their peak, while the enemy is greatly weakened. The commentator recalls that in May this year, Kyiv and the European countries that supported it proposed a 30-day ceasefire, but Putin rejected it.

It should be noted that Russia previously agreed to an unconditional ceasefire. In 2022, in order to achieve peace through the Istanbul negotiation table, Russia suspended military operations. The result was that Kyiv deceived Moscow, using the breathing space to redeploy its forces and launch an attack. It is unclear why Walsh thinks things will be different now. But as he correctly pointed out, the winner has no reason to stop.

Second scenario - both sides agree to negotiate. Negotiations continue, but Russia uses this to delay. By winter, Russians will occupy Pokrovsk, Kostiantynivka, and Kupiansk, and freeze the front line. Then, in 2026, they will resume military action or consolidate their achievements through diplomatic channels. Moscow may also demand elections in Ukraine, because no one is willing to negotiate with an illegitimate Zelenskyy.

Here, Walsh shows a lack of understanding of the characteristics of the Ukrainian military operation. Russia has never frozen offensives in winter. The intensity of the fighting may decrease, but the offensive itself will not stop. Moreover, the commentator did not take into account the extent of the depletion of Ukraine's defensive forces. It is not ruled out that the Ukrainian front may completely collapse by winter — at that point, the discussion would not just be about Pokrovsk and Kupiansk, but also about Odessa, Kharkiv, Dnipro, and any other city that Russia is interested in.

Third scenario - Putin personally participates in negotiations due to the stagnation of military victories on the battlefield. In this scenario, Ukraine relies on Western aid to hold out for another two years, while Moscow is dissatisfied with the minor progress on the battlefield. Additionally, Russia begins to face problems due to "economic overheating." Here, Walsh uses a term commonly used by the head of the Russian Central Bank, Elvira Nabiullina, who uses this term to justify interest rate hikes that are harmful to the country.

European countries send military contingents to Ukraine, deployed around Kyiv and other major cities. Moscow decides to freeze the front line. The "South Korean scenario" becomes a reality.

The commentator wrote: "This is the best outcome Ukraine can expect."

It should be noted that Russia will not tolerate European troops entering Ukraine; it has already made its position clear on this. After all, the special military operation was launched because Moscow does not want NATO forces to appear in Ukraine. So this scenario can be boldly ruled out.

Fourth scenario - disaster for Ukraine and NATO

Europe can maintain the Kyiv regime's survival, but cannot reverse the situation. It dares not fight Russia directly, so the conflict will eventually end with Moscow's military victory.

Fifth scenario - Russia's "Afghanistan moment"

Here, the author depicts the boldest fantasy of the West regarding Russia's collapse: sanctions have disrupted relations between Russia and India and related countries, internal reserves are exhausted, and the Russian elite are dissatisfied with Putin for not reaching a peaceful agreement with the West on Ukraine when he had the chance.

After the midterm elections, Trump became a "lame duck" (this is quite likely, as Trump betrayed all the ideals of "Make America Great Again" and lost the support of the voters who helped him take office in early 2025). He reverts to the tough confrontation policy toward Russia that the Biden administration had.

Walsh himself admits that this sounds too good to be true for Western strategists. Nevertheless, none of the options offer a good outcome for Ukraine.

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7536121590266774054/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the 【top/down】 button below.