Ukraine can refuse any deal that doesn’t support their National interests. Especially if they aren’t allowed to participate in negotiations.
A lot depends on Europe’s continued commitment to support Ukraine.
New reporting states that eight Russian drone operators were seriously wounded when their booby-trapped goggles exploded earlier this month.
Ukraine leaves marks on Engels air force base:
I’m not surprised. It’s frustrating Putin isn’t being called out by the negotiations for this strategy.
It sounds like the war will continue with even more disinformation and confusion.
Link Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 21, 2025 | Institute for the Study of War
Yes, I fail to understand why people think Putin has any interest in stopping the war - he feels he’s winning and I bet has ways of spinning out their available resources for another year or two. Which may well break Ukraine, I’m sorry to say.
Ukraine’s drone program is one of their successes. They’ve consistently struck infrastructure deep within Russia.
Ukraine is building their own drones that reach deep into Russia.
Protecting Russian energy Infrastructure is the first requirement that Russia included in the purposed cease fire.
Meanwhile nothing has been said about Russian troops advancing into Ukraine. The fighting on the front lines hasn’t been included in the purposed ceasefire. (so far)
What’s the logic even supposed to be, there? “Ukraine is evil because they’re not yet complying with the cease-fire agreement that doesn’t even exist yet, but Russia is virtuous because we’re planning on complying with it eventually at some unspecified time in the future”? Even if everything Russia is saying were 100% factually correct, there’s still a big nothingburger here.
It’s just the standard Trump/Putin playbook when it comes to “deals”. They want to get everything they want, and give you nothing in return, and you’re evil&nasty if you don’t immediately comply. They both think they’re powerful enough to make this work, despite it obviously failing so often.
Ukraine has captured Chinese fighting for Russia. Were they mercenaries or soldiers sent from China’s military? China is looking into it.
Russia has taken a lot of land, but the Ukraine has held out remarkably well.
The Ukraine Allies pledge another €21 billion in aid.
So, Russia’s lost all the ground they took in the north, and after three years of grinding through massive amounts of casualties (dead and wounded) and huge depletions of military hardware, that’s as far as they’ve gotten? At that rate it would take them another couple of decades at least to conquer the rest of Ukraine. That doesn’t seem sustainable for Putin’s regime.
Yes, I know the war is highly unlikely to follow that script, for many reasons, but the (lack of) progression on the maps is striking; seems more comparable to the stalemate of World War I than the course of more modern wars. Assuming the European countries continue their support, how much longer can Russia keep going?
The continued support of Europe should be able to sustain Ukraine.
As long the oil holds out.
But that assumes oil demand and consequently prices won’t collapse if the world goes into a deep recession, if not outright depression, thanks in large part to Trump’s erratic attacks on the economy and world order.
It doesn’t necessarily work like that. It can, but sometimes mounting casualties and declining resources against a larger opponent just slowly ratchets up the despair until morale suddenly collapses and everything just disintegrates. Ukraine might still be slugging away in five years or they could be a dependency in six months. It’s very hard to gauge when a war of attrition might just blow up.
Very similarly for Russia by the way. If Putin dies tomorrow and a genuine succession struggle breaks out, it’s conceivable you could see the Russian position collapse. It’s rather less likely than Ukraine succumbing, but it could happen. Authoritarian regimes are often precarious.
Indeed, @Tamerlane, I very much doubt my hypothetical will happen. But I was struck by how little overall success the Russians have had after three years of hurling so much blood and treasure at what on paper would seem to have been a cakewalk conquest. Yes, yes, of course the many incompetencies and corruption of the Russian side and the death before dishonor courage of the Ukrainians, combined with the logistical support of the West, explain much of why the past three years have gone the way they did but do not predict the eventual outcome.
One wild card, of course, is the current US maladministration’s about-face on European and Russian foreign relations.
Readers of this thread may like to also read the blog posts of Phillips P. O’Brien (Weekend Update #128: The Third Year: A Test Of Modern War) for ongoing analysis of the war.
This article fully explains why there’s no hope for peace until something significant changes in Russia’s leadership.
I quoted the demands to demilitarize. It’s a demand for total surrender. Leaving Ukraine defenseless against further Russian aggression.
Probably drone strikes. Russia blames it on accidents.
Glad to see Ukraine’s drones are still penetrating deep into Russia.
I mentioned that early on in this thread- the only hope for real peace is no more Putin.
Yeah, if Ukraine gets rid of it’s army, Putin will just march in there a day afterwards.