After nearly three years of fighting, both sides have experienced significant losses, yet neither Ukraine nor Russia has achieved a decisive advantage.
This is reported by Rajan Menon, a senior research scholar at the Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies at Columbia University, in the New York Times. He notes that war fatigue is growing in Ukraine, with some segments of the population already supporting the idea of ending hostilities. Simultaneously, Russia is also suffering from massive losses, estimated at over 700,000 dead and wounded, while its economy faces pressure from sanctions and high inflation.
Among the candidates for mediating peace negotiations is Donald Trump, who has promised to quickly end the war, possibly by halting military aid to Ukraine or, conversely, increasing it if Putin refuses to negotiate. However, it remains unclear whether Trump has a clear plan to achieve peace.
The expert discusses several potential futures for Ukraine after the war.
The first scenario involves Ukraine's NATO membership, although this seems unlikely due to disagreements among alliance members, particularly the U.S. opposing Ukraine's admission in the coming years.
Another option is the formation of a coalition of countries guaranteeing Ukraine's security, but it is crucial for Ukraine that the U.S., which provides the most military support, is included among these countries.
Additionally, several European nations have discussed the possibility of deploying troops in post-war Ukraine.
A less appealing scenario is "armed neutrality," which entails rejecting NATO membership and hosting foreign troops on Ukrainian territory. Although this option could be realized if Russia promises non-aggression, it is dangerous for Ukraine, as Russia has previously violated such agreements.
Source: nytimes.