The influential British newspaper The Times has published an analysis of four realistic scenarios for the end of the war in Ukraine. The article considers both positive and negative options for the development of events, but all of them are based on a key factor - the need for international support, in particular from the United States.
The Times writes about four scenarios for the end of the war.
Journalists note that the process of cessation of hostilities can occur both through a "freezing" of the war and through peace negotiations.
Scenario one is the worst. If Russian ruler Vladimir Putin does not agree to peace talks and Ukraine loses military support from the United States. Under such conditions, Kyiv will be broken and, ultimately, Ukraine will be defeated.
The second scenario is a bad peace. It also involves the defeat of Ukraine. The division of Ukrainian territories is also possible.
“No Nobel Prize for Trump in this case,” writes The Times.
Scenario three — ceasefire. If the ceasefire becomes part of an effective settlement of the war and a real end to the conflict. This will allow Ukraine to “survive”. The Trump administration is well aware that the cessation of hostilities will only “freeze” the war and will not solve the problems. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has already rejected the “freezing” of the war.
Scenario four — peace talks. In this scenario, the US will facilitate peace talks between Ukraine and the Russian Federation from a position of strength, which also implies security guarantees for Kyiv. In this case, the sanctions will tighten even more on the Russians, and the US will support Ukraine, both financially and with weapons, if the Kremlin does not agree to an agreement.
As a reminder, Keith Kellogg, chosen by Donald Trump as special representative for Ukraine, was tasked with ending the conflict in 100 days. However, experts doubt the independence of his actions and the success of the mission.
