Post Segments
First scenario: Russians break through and Ukraine’s forces collapse.
Despite serious efforts to modernise, Russia’s command and control methods are rigid and old fashioned. Russia’s infantry still lacks the skills needed to break through the increasingly strong Ukraine defence lines. In my view, this first scenario is unlikely, assuming European support continues.
The CSIS estimate that Putin could carry on fighting at this level of intensity for another three years. The collapse of foreign investment has been replaced by huge state spending on its military and their supporting industries. The domestic economy is in dire condition. Russia has adapted to sanctions, certainly enough to keep the war machine running. Despite sanctions energy exports still pay for 30% of the government budget. Trump’s new sanctions have lost India and China as markets for Russian oil and gas exports. This does not stop support from China, Iran and North Korea supplying several thousand combat troops plus a huge amount of artillery ammunition and drones. However, should energy export orders dry up or inflation shoot up, Russia would face economic challenges to carry on fighting.
Although further economic pressure from Donald Trump has been imposed, his resuming an arms supply for Ukraine looks most unlikely. Winning a Nobel Peace Prize appears his main obsession although his peace deal for Gaza looks like a speedway to catastrophe. Judging from the present drone and cyber sabotage attacks on several NATO countries, Putin calculates that Trump is all wind and no trousers. Probably, long ago, Putin drew the obvious conclusion and that explains why the Russians were so keen that Trump was elected.
Even if the money starts running out, Putin could resort to conscription rather than pay bonus sums at higher rates to recruit replacements for dead and crippled soldiers. The war has cost 3,000 tanks and thousands of other vehicles. The number of tanks lost exceeds the pre-war inventory. Soviet era tanks are being refurbished rather than a production line building modern replacements. There are plans for the manufacture of some 2,000 modern T 90 tanks but as a future threat to NATO.
Putin almost fooled Trump into handing over the Ukrainian fortress zone to Russia. Trump, draft dodger during the Vietnam War, of course has no military experience, doesn’t understand the exploitation of natural features and power of ground generally. Zelensky knew such a move was plain stupid and would hand Putin ground that had cost Russia 300,000 killed and wounded so far this year, ground still firmly held by the Ukrainians. Zelensky stood up to Trump, arguing with an ignorant old man who thinks himself cleverer than most people, and rightly refused. One gathers Trump threw the maps of the front line around the room rather than learn the facts.
My gut feeling is that so long as the Rest of NATO [RNATO] keeps up our support, Putin will be no nearer victory three years from now. Also, by that time, many of the joint ventures with British and other RNATO allies will be churning out drones and long range weapons from factories in Ukraine, Europe and the British Isles.
Second Scenario: Forever War at lower intensity.
Such a move is tempting for Putin. He rests his forces while they regroup and rearm. Ukraine is still at war and thus its future in limbo. Putin may not have won but hasn’t lost. He and his claque remain in power.
This concept doesn’t allow for RNATO taking action without Trump. The British with robust NATO, Commonwealth and global allies should not allow Putin a comfort zone. If Russia turned down the heat to simmer, we should help Ukraine turn it up full to boil. The ISW report on Russian casualties indicates that Ukraine drone skills make it extremely difficult for Putin to fight at lower intensity. That’s what he’s been doing since spring and look at the Russian casualties. Such high casualties plus an appalling death to wounded rate could lead to mass mutiny. Even if Trump declines to supply Tomahawk missiles, Ukraine will manufacture its own, possibly during this year. Old heavy bombs from Soviet times – the Ukrainians have plenty – can be attached to the modern guided missiles.
On this side of the Atlantic RNATO has no option other than keeping Ukraine in the fight. Otherwise, one by one, we are the bear’s next meal. Trump can sit on the bench and day dream but he’s finished America as leader of the democracies. We need a new global alliance of the democracies that will make the big powers blink.
Third scenario: Ceasefire because Russia decides it wants to stop fighting.
This becomes more likely the longer the war drags on although an event or adverse trend would be needed to make Putin change course. There’s a form of public opinion in Russia. I’m told by diplomat friends who have served in Russia that most people back the war but remain puzzled why it started in the first place. One friend talked regularly to the Academy of Sciences about Ukraine and found experts who regard Ukraine as a different culture, language and society from Russia.
Ukraine soon could have the means to bring about a Russian urge for a ceasefire. During this summer Ukraine’s long range drone strikes caused a petrol shortage and one closed Moscow airport. My hunch was that Trump would back off selling Tomahawk missiles when destined for Ukraine. They can’t be launched and steered without American help therefore the risk of escalation is too dangerous. RNATO should help Ukraine speed up its own programme and production. The money would go further in Ukraine than high pay America. That would allow Ukraine to damage oil and gas production and storage, logistics hubs, airbases and arsenals. A financial crash or debt crisis would put a great deal of pressure on the Kremlin to end the war and repair the economy.
Fourth scenario: Putin’s nightmare — a peace agreement followed by major crisis in Russia.
CSIS regard this as the most unlikely scenario. For such a result to happen would require Trump to increase sanctions on Russia, RNATO to increase its support and the Ukrainians’ long range attacks inside Russia to cause a run on the banks and crash the economy.
My gut instinct is that Putin would not risk deploying a tactical nuclear weapon for the first time since 1945 on his fellow Slavs whom he claims are brothers. Russia would never accept RNATO troops as peacekeepers. Far better the Coalition of the Willing concentrate on building Ukraine’s forces and defence industries. Putin must suffer defeat and throughout Russia seen to have been defeated.
May I recommend an article by Nigel Gould-Davies on the website of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) where he explains, very well indeed, why we should not be surprised when Russia sends flocks of drones over RNATO neighbours and makes cyber attacks on our economies.[i] ISW reports that Ukrainian intelligence say Russia’s shadow fleet numbers about 500 tankers, moreover many have special forces teams on board including the ship arrested and later released by France last month. Why should we put up with this modern piracy?
There is a further scenario. Inflation and soaring interest rates cause melt down of Russia’s banking and commerce. Other problems follow which overshadow all else. Food supply chains break down, power supplies fail, transport becomes difficult. Eventually the fighting dribbles to a stop. All those troops decide to trek home and look after their next of kin. Many will go hunting for the people who put them through this meat mincer. We may see a repeat of the Soviet Union’s collapse. RNATO needs a plan. Russia will never accept an RNATO peacekeeper force but a civil support team is a different matter. We have to be ready mentally and practically to help not only Ukrainians but also ordinary Russians – who never have experienced democratic government – finally take the plunge and live in a free country.
With all due deference to CSIS and their fascinating report, I’m not so sure this last scenario is the least likely.
Adrian Hill’s experiences as soldier and diplomat include the huge tank battle for Lahore in 1965, the Six Day War, troubles in Cyprus, Vietnam and Northern Ireland. Later he was the Director of the British Information Services and media spokesman in North America during the South Atlantic War and the IRA Hunger Strike.
[i] https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/online-analysis/2025/10/the-russiaukraine-war-has-entered-a-new-phase/
