Main scenarios of Ukraine’s future – Valerii Pekar

by Valerii Pekar

Ukrainian futurist, entrepreneur and public figure, lecturer at the Kyiv-Mohyla Business School

What happens next?

It is necessary to understand, at least in general terms, the possible future scenarios. At least, this is what businesses need to plan their activities. So, in my opinion, the scenarios of the development of events at the moment look like this. We take at least 2 years here to consider the consequences of elections in key countries. You won’t like all the following, but someone has to say it. If you prefer not knowing, stop here and read no further.

Inputs (what we know so far):

1. Positional warfare does not lead to a significant change in the battle line. According to military analysts, each side’s defensive capability exceeds the other’s offensive capability.
2. Currently, the West does not consider the scenario of a Russian defeat as acceptable, with all the consequences of the quantity and quality of arms supplies.
3. Putin has chosen a strategy of war of attrition, in which an authoritarian Russia has a better chance than Ukraine, which is dependent on democratic allies whose position may change after the elections (in which Russia will certainly interfere to this end).

Three main scenarios for Ukraine follow from this.

1. Continuation of the war of attrition.

Worst case scenario, and so far things are moving along that trajectory. A change of power in Western countries will lead to a decrease in support to the level where Ukraine will not be able to continue the war and will be forced to negotiate peace on Russia’s terms. Even if political support remains at the current level, the number of points of tension in the world will increase, distracting from Ukraine. The ability of the West to provide weapons will begin to run out. No one will be able to put the American or European economy on a war footing (Ukraine is not capable of to provide himself with modern weapons, although he must take all possible steps in this direction). In fact, this scenario means the defeat of Ukraine, which leaves no chance for the recovery of the economy (at the same time, it is also a defeat for Russia, but they are satisfied with the end of the war with a mutual defeat). In domestic politics, Ukraine also has problems, because it is impossible to hold elections during an endless martial law, and if they are held, they preserve the current government in the worst way, which gives the West reasons to finally abandon Ukraine as an undemocratic country, or lead to mass protests. which will have extremely negative consequences during the war.

1. Frozen war.

This scenario gives the West a way out of the current trap of “defeat, victory and procrastination are equally unacceptable.” In this scenario, the Allies leave support for Ukraine at roughly the current level to prevent Ukraine’s defeat and Russia’s defeat. Noting the impossibility of achieving success, the Western allies are pushing Ukraine to negotiate a freeze on the conflict, while at the same time putting a lot of pressure on Putin (he does not need elections today, because the bet is on the first scenario, but many factors can change the situation). The initiator of the negotiations will be either Biden in the spring or summer of 2024 (he needs to look like a winner in the elections or at least a peacemaker), or the winner of the American elections in the spring of 2025. After the signing of the peace agreement, both sides (Ukraine with the help of the West, Russia with the help of China) begin to intensively prepare for the next war, which will take place in 5 years (minimum 3, maximum 7). Since the peace agreement leads to the lifting of martial law, democratic elections are held, in which new faces win, representing a course for comprehensive modernization, while Zelensky is associated with defeat and withdraws from the political scene (refusal to hold democratic elections in peacetime will have it has even worse consequences). During the preparation, Russia has a chance to learn from the mistakes of 2022, and Ukraine has a chance to significantly modernize (not only in the technical, but also in the institutional aspect; I will also note in brackets that it is worth starting already). In the best case scenario, Ukraine modernizes so well that Russia is wary of attacking. In the worst case, Ukraine prepares poorly, and the second invasion leads to a complete defeat and the establishment of a pro-Russian regime (see the first and second Chechen wars).

1. Victory.

Ukraine manages to convince its allies that Russia’s defeat is an acceptable (and even desirable) scenario. The aid is sharply increasing to a level that makes it possible to carry out a spring-summer counteroffensive successfully, liberate the South and Crimea, significantly shorten the front line, freeze the occupied part of the East until better times, and in this format enter into negotiations on Ukrainian terms. After the signing of peace, Ukraine joins NATO and receives a lot of money for economic recovery and modernization. Victorious Ukraine attracts the attention of the world in various aspects. The security situation is favorable for economic growth, unblocked seas are open for exports. Zelensky easily wins the democratic elections as the winner of the war. Meanwhile, Russia’s defeat leads to the accumulation of factors that lead to political change, as has always happened in its history after military defeats. These changes (in the soft format of refederalization or in the more likely hard format of decolonization) make further Russian aggression impossible. The “Victory” scenario is the least likely, because it involves the level of strategic and negotiating skills that Ukraine currently does not have. At the same time, he is the only one who ensures the survival of the ruling political team, and it is good that the interests of society and the political elite coincide.

Two final remarks.

1. There can always be some “black swans” or even “gray rhinos” (a long-awaited event). For example, Putin can die, and the possible duration of hiding this information is much less than needed to determine a successor and consolidate power. But betting on such events is pointless.
2. Trump is an eccentric and completely unpredictable character, so there is a non-zero probability that, due to certain factors, he will suddenly turn in the direction of maximum support for Ukraine. But it is obvious that betting on it is just as pointless.

I want to emphasize once again: the future is not predetermined. Better scenarios are possible, you just have to implement them, not just believe.

Source.