My vote was “some other scenario”, and it will depend on when and if Vlad dies or becomes disabled.
Neither do I. However, I found it-
It is twisted and tortured since Crimea was kinda sorta and independent state for a while- Ukrainian independence was supported by a referendum later in 1991 in all regions of the Ukrainian SSR, including Crimea (although in Crimea the independence was supported by a slim majority).[3][4][5]
In 1994, the legal status of Crimea as part of Ukraine was backed up by Russia, who pledged to uphold the territorial integrity of Ukraine in a memorandum signed in 1994, also signed by the US and UK.[23][24]
IIt seems like Crimea was not long part of Ukraine.
As @alphaboi867 points out, the result may not have been much different in a referendum conducted in any other circumstances. The peninsula’s two administrative divisions only narrowly voted for Ukraine’s independence from the USSR in the 1991 referendum (contrasting markedly from the 84 to 99% support in every other division). Opinion polling in the decade or so prior to annexation by Russia consistently showed very strong support for uniting with Russia (65% to 70% in three-way yes/no/undecided polls). And purely anecdotally, I know several (expatriate) Crimeans who supported such a union years before it happened, and who were overjoyed when it finally came to pass.
The only way to be sure is demilitarize the peninsula and hold an actual referendum monitored by international observers.
Let’s be real, if the outcome were really likely to break toward Russia, they wouldn’t have felt the need to annex the territory and run an election under military control.
Choose this one. I can’t see Russia giving up claims to parts of Ukraine. It’s too important and they see Ukraine as being a part of Russia.
A lot depends on continued Western support.
I voted “other”. Russia will probably take over Ukraine but will have spend much time and energy fighting an Ukrainian underground bent on causing the Russians as much trouble as possible.
Bump
It’s been nearly two years since this thread was started and much has changed.
Ukraine recently passed a milestone of some significance. It doesn’t seem to be getting any attention with legacy media but the effectiveness of drones has advanced to a point now that last month Ukraine managed to kill (not merely wound, but video confirmed kia) more Russians than the Kremlin could recruit. Drones are only going to get more effective and lethal with each passing month this conflict continues.
ww1 seems to be most closely mirroring this conflict. Tiny gains on the battlefield bought at horrific cost as new technologies rapidly progress in an effort to break the stalemate. One side gave out (Germany) when its economic and industrial means could no longer support the war effort. At the time of surrender, Germany was still fighting in France.
Russia is selling its gold reserves currently. My prediction is the Russian economy will crater during late 2026 and some kind of ‘black swan’ event will occur (kinda like the Prigozhin ‘uprising’ in 2023 - only conducted more earnest) that the Kremlin isn’t able to deal with due in large part to their depleted economic position. Putin will end up dead and the new leader(s) will have no personal ego tied to the invasion and will accept the peace terms offered, along with whatever (more or less reasonable) security guarantees put in place.
I’m going to check on this thread in a couple of years to see how close or wrong I was. Curious to see.
The New York Times ran an article about the autonomous drones Ukraine is using now partly because Russia jams the signals from the human operators.
Cite? I still have ten gift articles unused for this month.
Gift link to the New York Times Magazine article I referred to upthread, about the autonomous drones Ukraine is now using.
Under the pressures of invasion, Ukraine has become a fast-feedback, live-fire test range in which arms manufacturers, governments, venture capitalists, frontline units and coders and engineers from around the West collaborate to produce weapons that automate parts of the conventional military kill chain.
Note that I’m conflicted about this; I am sympathetic to the Ukrainian cause and want them to succeed but realize that whatever developments occur here will be used against targets less unsympathetic than the invading Russian army.
Soon everyone will be able to do this. Soon the source code to 3D-print those drones and to steer them will be available in the dark, then in the open net. This will be the weapon to end all wars, all conflicts. It will be hell.
WWI, the Great War, was also called the War to End All Wars. That did not age well.
The asshole with the less scruples wins. Or the one with the least to lose does it. Or it is self defense, so go ahead. Or Deus Vult , always a good excuse.
Then will be the time to remember: Putin started this. He is reaping what he deserves, and still too little, too late for him. And the USA forced Ukraine to develop those weapons, because Biden was not corageous enough, then trump was in Putin’s pocket. And Europe did not muster the will. Will serve us right, all of us.
I can’t see any future where Ukraine isn’t racing toward a nuclear weapon plus delivery systems, and Russia isn’t likewise rushing to stop it. Enormously dangerous situation in the 5-year timeframe. It’s hard to see a 10-year timeframe that doesn’t contain glowing glassy craters.
And who can stop it? What country or international body has even a shred of credibility to tell Ukraine “don’t build nukes, we’ll take care of things for you.” Ukraine has heard that story before, and it got them here.
I don’t think its sustainable on either side. Ukraine is spending 40% of GDP on the military, which isn’t sustainable long term. That is what nations were spending at the height of WW2.
Russia is rapidly running out of soviet stockpiles of artillery and tanks that they can refurbish and send into the war. Their official military is largely decimated and I get the impression a big part of what is left is poorly trained conscripts. Russia does have powerful defenses in conquered territory that makes it hard for Ukraine to recapture the territory it lost.
What I think will happen is Ukraine will let Russia have the territory they’ve conquered and a stalemate will be declared. Even if a peace treaty is signed, nobody trusts Russia. Hopefully Ukraine arms itself to the teeth, and hopefully so do the baltic nations and Poland. But Poland could probably march on Moscow at this point if it weren’t for Russias nuclear weapons.
For several more years there was no real territory gained or lost, both sides cannot sustain the war and they agree to stop fighting and let Russia have the territory they stole.
Sadly, in any society, it is women that are the reproductive bottleneck, not men, and I suspect Russia can afford to lose several million more men with little to no demographic consequence. Not that reproduction is what everything is about, but it’s why Russia was able to lose tens of millions of men in WWII and still carry on afterwards. Ukraine can’t bleed Russia into changing its mind, but with entrenched-enough defenses it can make it no longer worth it for Russia to continue. Economic warfare may matter a lot more than combat KIA.
Russia has far more wealth and manpower than Ukraine. However Russia seems to be running out of materiel, which mean they won’t be able to gain any new territory. They will probably run out of artillery barrels next year. I get the impression that the borders now are pretty much not moving much. If all Russia has is infantry and drones, I don’t know if the conquered land will change much. Russian jets cause pain and suffering for Ukraine, but they don’t really change the land borders.
Russia is also facing 20%+ inflation. Plus if Putin squeezes the oligarchs too much to fund the war, I don’t know if that’ll cause any internal stability in the regime.
It feels like a few more years of fairly stable borders until both nations realize they can’t keep up economically and neither is seeing their borders in Ukraine change.
I see in North South Korean scenario likely… no big (end of war) declarations or so… the fighting will just peter out and eventually end.
Status quo will define de facto borders.
Huge loudspeakers will replace artillery.
Sending in WW2 period tanks for example.
Some of it, like Crimea, but by no means all.