Before launching his offensive against Ukraine on February 24, Vladimir Putin had a very clear scenario in mind: the invasion was to be concluded within a few days. Today, after three months of conflict, it is difficult to say with certainty how the war could end.
What trajectories could the conflict take given the current state of forces, objectives and difficulties? Which are the most likely? For franceinfo, several specialists have looked into different scenarios.
Ukraine repels the offensive with Western support and wins the war
This is the scenario dreamed up by supporters of kyiv. NATO has recently taken to hope: the Ukrainian army has managed to regain control of Kharkiv, the second city of the country, in the northeast. She herself launched a counter-offensive in the direction of Izium, southeast of Kharkiv. The Russian army continues to make tactical errors, such as crossing the Donets River which resulted in the destruction of at least 73 tanks, according to the Ukrainian army quoted by AP * . It could also lack vital forces, as its soldiers come to the end of their military service.
But for Ukraine, what would really represent a victory? Would returning to the situation before February 24 suffice? Apparently not : “We hope that Crimea will become part of Ukraine”Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told the wall street journal* May 3. For Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Maliar, quoted by the FinancialTimes*, The objective is “the complete cleansing of our country and the establishment of sovereignty [ukrainienne] within its borders” which includes Crimea and the eastern provinces of Donbass, Ukrainian territories controlled by Russia and pro-Russian separatists respectively since 2014.
However, the recovery of these territories could be extremely difficult from a military point of view. “These territories have been in conflict for eight years, the separatists and the Russian soldiers know the terrain, they have had time to strengthen their positions”, explains to franceinfo Christine Dugoin-Clément, researcher associated with the “risks” chair of the IAE research laboratory at Paris-Sorbonne Business School. A Ukrainian counter-offensive could therefore be very costly in terms of human life and material – one of the reasons why Ukraine continues to demand increasing and continuous military support.
Russia wins the war by “economic” and military suffocation of Ukraine
For its part, Moscow continues to progress in several areas, such as around Severodonetsk, in the Donbass. It reproduces on other cities the strategy of siege followed successfully against Mariupol (continuous bombardments and blockage of the Ukrainian supply), and it continues to strike Ukrainian strategic points (stockpiles of ammunition, railroads or electric power stations ). The Russian army has also learned the lessons of its failure in kyiv: by withdrawing to its own territory, it avoids stretching its supply chains too much, which makes them less vulnerable.
The knockout blow could come from the wallet. At the same time, Russia is pursuing a strategy of“economic suffocation” of Ukraine, for Carole Grimaud-Potter, lecturer in geopolitics of Russia at Paul-Valéry University in Montpellier.
“The economic centers of Ukraine are in the east and on the Black Sea coast, which Russia controls or blocks, including the port of Odessa.”
Carole Grimaud-Potter, lecturer in Russian geopolitics at Paul-Valéry University in Montpellierat franceinfo
So many elements that suggest that Ukraine could end up giving in. This scenario could be accelerated by a relaxation of Western support, “determinant in the resistance of Ukraine” according to Mathieu Boulègue, associate researcher for the Russia and Eurasia program of the Chatham House think tank. The economic costs of the war could deter the United States and Europe from continuing their financial and military support. The first cracks have already appeared in European unity: Hungary is opposed to tougher sanctions on Russian oil, for fear of running out of energy.
But this scenario also has flaws in the eyes of analysts, who point to the resistance of Ukrainian troops on the ground. “Russia does not have the means to carry out high-intensity operations in the long term”affirms Mathieu Boulègue, who recalls that the Russian troops failed to take the city of kyiv.
The war sets in, with neither side winning.
This explains why the perspective most often mentioned is that of a lasting conflict. “The lines could stabilize around the territorial limits of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts”believes Mathieu Boulègue.
“It will not be a ‘frozen conflict’: there will be tactical moves, breakthroughs and defenses on each side. But the situation may drag on for ten, twenty, thirty years, as long as Moscow does not get enough territory to present it as a victory.”
Mathieu Boulègue, associate researcher at the Chatham House think tankat franceinfo
The opposite of blitzkrieg that Vladimir Putin hoped for on February 24. But the Kremlin is used to protracted wars. Carole Grimaud-Potter draws a parallel with the war in Afghanistan, from 1979 to 1989: “At the time, the USSR already had far too big objectives compared to its number of troops, it had not foreseen the extent of the resistance, it had not succeeded in blocking international support.”
But Moscow does not have the means to hold on forever either. International sanctions threaten to devastate its economy, and the cost of the war is growing day by day, humanly and economically: Russia has spent more than 300 million dollars a day on its army, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense quoted by the Moscow Times*.
Peace negotiations eventually succeed
This is why Ukraine, like Russia, could decide to find a way out through negotiation. Currently, the chances are slim: the talks have been suspended since May 17. Moscow points a “total lack of will” from kyiv, and Ukraine accuses Russia of remaining in a “stereotypical thinking”. Volodymyr Zelensky, however, continues to emit favorable signs: “There are things we can only achieve at the negotiating table.”, said the Ukrainian president on the Ukrainian channel ICTV. But in the eyes of the researchers interviewed, as long as the dynamics of the war can be favorable to kyiv, the negotiations are unlikely to succeed: “Ukraine currently has the possibility of regaining ground, even if it is in small steps, and it is keen to recover the occupied territories”explains Christine Dugoin-Clément.
“A ceasefire could be just a pause while waiting for the right moment to relaunch an offensive.”
Christine Dugoin-Clément, associate researcher at Paris-Sorbonne Business Schoolat franceinfo
On his side, “Moscow is a prisoner of its own rhetoric”believes Mathieu Boulègue. “Russia had been selling its people a ‘Three Day War’, total military superiority. It can’t admit that it’s not going well. And basically, its overall goal remains to completely subjugate Ukraine.” “There is little chance that Russia will return Crimea to Ukraine”adds Christine Dugoin-Clément, which is nevertheless one of kyiv’s objectives.
With such irreconcilable views, “we will probably go through a period of alternating ceasefires, unsuccessful negotiations and renewed fighting”for Carole Grimaud-Potter. “What the Donbass has been experiencing since 2014 and which we have not managed to get out of.”
Russia spreads the conflict to neighboring countries
A protracted conflict is a higher risk of slippage. “A spread of the conflict to neighboring countries cannot be ruled out”, said Emmanuel Macron May 19. A Russian missile falling on NATO territory, nuclear threats carried out, “by accident, by weariness or by frustration… We must imagine the broadest possible scenarios so as not to find ourselves without an answer in the face of a fait accompli.considers Mathieu Boulègue.
But in the eyes of specialists, a nuclear escalation remains unlikely. “It would threaten the very stability of the regime, which is the main objective of Vladimir Putin’s system”, says the researcher. Reacting to the NATO membership procedure launched by Finland and Sweden, the Russian Foreign Minister simply stated that this would not “no big difference”, according to Reuters*. A limited reaction compared to previous threats, which “suggests if not an appeasement, at least an inflection of the Russian discourse”, according to Carole Grimaud-Potter. For the researcher, “the population would not understand why it would be necessary to open other fronts, and Russia does not have the means of it.”
Regime change is coming to Moscow
A Russian population that could rebel against Vladimir Putin? “This man cannot stay in power”Joe Biden had said, suggesting that this scenario was being considered by Ukraine’s allies.
In fact, in Russia, “anti-war sentiment is growing”says Carole Grimaud-Potter: “even rather pro-Russian bloggers criticized the catastrophic failure of the Donets River crossing. Between that and the weight of the economic sanctions, we can see that Russian society is cracking.” Recently, a former colonel even highlighted the difficulties of the offensive on Russian state television, as reported The Express (paid item).
But few are those who really believe in a scenario of inner revolt. “Any attempt to denounce the war is punishable by imprisonment”, recalls Carole Grimaud-Potter. And regardless of the penalties: “The Russian leadership is not interested in the well-being of its people”Judge Mathieu Boulègue, for whom a change in the ruling elites will take years. “Everything that comes after Vladimir Putin will not necessarily be better”, he points out. One of the many unknowns in a conflict whose outcome is still uncertain.
* These links refer to content in English.