We’ve had a few prior threads about the possible outcomes or end games of the conflict in Ukraine, but AFAIK no poll about the long-term outlook. So here’s my question to everyone: based on your knowledge today, which of the following is the most likely state or outcome of the Ukraine–Russia conflict by the year 2034?
The conflict is largely over. Ukraine has remained independent, regained control of all territory annexed by Russia, and annexed some Russian territory.
The conflict is largely over. Ukraine has remained independent, regained control of all territory annexed by Russia, and occupied (but not formally annexed) some Russian territory.
The conflict is largely over. Ukraine has remained independent, regained control of some territory annexed by Russia, and renounced all claims to the remaining territory annexed by Russia.
The conflict is largely over. Ukraine has remained independent and regained control of all territory annexed by Russia.
The conflict is largely over. Ukraine has remained independent but renounced all claims to territory annexed by Russia.
The conflict has become frozen, with little or no active fighting but with no peace treaty and both sides maintaining their claims to the annexed territories.
The conflict is still very much active, with regular fighting.
The conflict is largely over. Russia has defeated Ukraine, kept the territory it annexed, and installed a government that allows the rest of Ukraine to remain nominally independent so long as it is friendly or subservient to Russia.
The conflict is largely over. Russia has defeated Ukraine, kept the territory it annexed, and occupied (but not formally annexed) the remaining territory of Ukraine.
The conflict is largely over. Russia has defeated Ukraine and annexed its remaining territory as a nominally autonomous oblast within the Russian Federation.
The conflict is largely over. Russia has defeated Ukraine and annexed its remaining territory without granting even nominal autonomy.
Some other situation that I will describe in a reply to this thread.
I chose “The conflict has become frozen, with little or no active fighting but with no peace treaty and both sides maintaining their claims to the annexed territories” as the closest to what I think will happen, but it’s still not quite there.
I think the war will largely be over, with Russia probably controlling some of the annexed parts of Ukraine, but Ukraine will never formally concede those territories, and Russia will continue to claim they should own all of Ukraine. There will be some formal cessation of hostilities short of an actual treaty, and both sides will maintain significant forces on either side of the border, with the expectation that things will heat up again in a few years. Not a “frozen” war, so much as “planning for the next war”.
I’d guess that by 2034, Russia might still be holding Crimea and perhaps small parts of eastern Ukraine. I’d guess that the Ukrainians will not recognize this but that the fighting will have stopped.
I also think that to posit a scenario in which Ukraine annexes or occupies territory in Russia proper is to misrepresent the nature of the conflict. Even the utter collapse of Russia would not turn Ukraine into an expansionist power.
50%The conflict has become frozen, with little or no active fighting but with no peace treaty and both sides maintaining their claims to the annexed territories.
The conflict is largely over. Ukraine has remained independent, regained control of some territory annexed by Russia, and NOT renounced claims to the remaining territory annexed by Russia- i.e
Crimea.
Most likely outcome is that Western support to Ukraine will never rise to the extent of enabling Ukraine to retake back any significant amount of territory. It settles down into a new status quo where neither Russia nor Ukraine has enough resources to finish off the other. Ukraine pressures hard to get NATO admission as a member but enough NATO members (>0) consistently balk and Ukraine cannot get in, however, Ukraine does get various more-informal security assurances or statements from some western nations. Longterm, both Russia and Ukraine suffer population loss and brain drain, but Ukraine worse so.
I went with the war is over, Ukraine is still independent, but Russia got to keep the territory they occupied at the end of the war.
Choosing just one is limiting, as I think some of the scenarios are so outlandish as to be out of the question, and others seem like they are similar enough to have a roughly equal chance.
In particular, I don’t think there’s any scenario with Ukraine losing that doesn’t involve Russia occupying a pile of rubble, having had to turn the whole of Ukraine into a series of one Bakhmut after another in the process of their achieving “victory”. Why do I think this? Because Russia isn’t giving Ukraine the classic “die on your feet vs. live on your knees” scenario. They only offer die on your feet or die on your knees.
Russia breaks apart, China invades Irkutsk and Central and Eastern Siberia including Vladivostok, Yakutia becomes independent, Kaliningrad is called Köpenik again, but will not be part of Germany or independent (perhaps part of Poland?), St. Petersburg and Kiev get nuked.
That is not how I voted, however. But I believe the result in ten years time will be worse than all the alternatives offered. And the West is not going to come out of this unscathed either.
Sorry, your answer is too idiomatic to me, I do not follow: Do you mean you agree with me or that I am completely bonkers? Replying to ekedolphin, as Discourse does not show this clearly when the answer comes immediately after the post that is being replied to.
I picked “frozen” because that’s the only 2-year outcome I can see. Right now I think Ukraine loses some of its Kharkiv gains and then both sides are at stalemate with sporadic fighting, and endless shelling from Russia. Put another way, what we’re seeing now, but at decreasing intensity for the next 2 years.
2 years is as far forward as I’m confident estimating. The political and security situation between Russia, US, China, and Europe is a real wildcard. There’s really no limit to the prediction-wrecking gamechangers that could come out of those polities.
The Crimeans don’t want to be part of Ukraine. Even in a free and fair referendum with EU & UN observes and no Russian troops on the ground Crimea would still have voted to join Russia. I don’t see that changing unless something like the Russian Federation breaking up and/or Ukraine joining the EU happen.
No, but I could see some of the border areas asking to join Ukraine under such circumstances. Unlikely, but possible, and doesn’t require Ukraine to be actively seeking expansion.
Sure, a Russian-occupied territory voted in a Russian-controlled election, at gunpoint, to be part of Russia, with no international observers, and 95% in favor. Sounds like a legit election
Why would the Russians push the people of Crimea to vote in favor of being part of Ukraine? Double check what you are replying to- unless he meant Russia?
I was thinking of the 2014 referendum which is purported as being 97% in favor of Crimea joining Russia. This was a referendum done at gunpoint, with Russian military occupying the buildings and controlilng the election, and the ballot didn’t even contain an option to maintain status quo.
So my reply was going off memory, I have no idea what Snarky_Kong was referring to with Crimea voting to stay with Ukraine. It makes sense but I’m not aware of whatever referendum he’s referring to.
