What could happen if Russia wins war in Ukraine? Experts consider the scenarios
A “battered but triumphant” Russian army amassing on NATO’s borders, posing a major military threat to the alliance for the first time in three decades?
That’s what could happen if the United States cut off military aid to Ukraine and Europe followed suit, according to a prominent thinktank.
Republicans in Washington have been holding up new funds for Kyiv over demands for border control, leading to concerns over the reliability of American support.
Ukraine war latest: Moscow issues nuclear testing threat to US
Things look particularly tremulous in the context of 2024: a presidential election where the presumed challenger Donald Trump is poised to abandon both Ukraine and NATO.
So as unsavoury as the thought may be for many in the West, some attention is now turning to a possible future in which aid to Ukraine is much reduced – and what it could mean for those holding the line in Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.
The Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a thinktank based in Washington DC, has looked at possible scenarios that could arise.
It argues that the US has a “much higher stake” in the war than most people think.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Putin quizzed at Moscow Q&A
“A Russian conquest of all of Ukraine is by no means impossible if the United States cuts off all military assistance and Europe follows suit,” ISW writers say in their new report: The High Price of Losing Ukraine.
“Such an outcome would bring a battered but triumphant Russian army right up to NATO’s border from the Black Sea to the Arctic Ocean.”
They say that Ukraine – with Western support – has destroyed nearly 90% of the Russian army that invaded in February 2022, according to US intelligence sources.
But despite these terrible casualty numbers, Russia has replaced them and is ramping up its industrial base to replenish its material losses.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Russian women ‘want husbands back’
A victorious Russian army at the end of the Ukraine war, the ISW says, would be combat experienced and considerably larger than its pre-2022 forces.
Moscow’s economy would “gradually recover as sanctions inevitably erode” and its military would rebuild its coherence “drawing on a wealth of hard-won experience fighting mechanized warfare”.
It added: “It will bring with it advanced air defence systems that only American stealth aircraft – badly needed to deter and confront China – can reliably penetrate.
“Russia can pose a major conventional military threat to NATO for the first time since the 1990s in a timeframe set to a considerable extent by how much the Kremlin invests in its military.”
Read more:
Military chief questions UK’s readiness for ‘dangerous times’
How the Kremlin creates a nation of patriots
The ISW argues NATO’s military potential is much greater than that of Russia – even if it fully absorbs Ukraine and Belarus.
But, it says, the costs of allowing Russia to win in Ukraine are “higher than most people imagine”.
The ISW argues:
• The US would have to deploy a “sizeable portion” of its ground forces to eastern Europe
• The US could face a “terrible choice” between keeping enough stealth aircraft in Asia to defend Taiwan and stationing them in Europe to support allies against any Russian aggression
A Ukrainian tank near Bakhmut in the Donetsk region
The thinktank’s report says: “Helping Ukraine keep the lines where they are through continuous Western military support is far more advantageous and cheaper for the United States than allowing Ukraine to lose.”
A ceasefire that “freezes” the conflict would give Russia time and space to prepare for a new war, it adds
The more territory Ukraine is able to regain, the further to the east it would push the Kremlin’s forces.
Best of all, the ISW says, would be supporting Ukraine to victory and then helping it rebuild.
This would put the “largest and most combat-effective friendly military on the European continent” at the forefront of NATO’s defence, according to the thinktank.
“A victorious Ukraine would not be a permanent ward of the West,” it says, arguing that restored to its 1991 borders its economy is big enough to support its own military.
World
Putin wasn’t at the White House, but his influence was – the moments which reveal his hold over Trump
Vladimir Putin wasn’t at the White House but his influence clearly was. At times, it dominated the room.
There were three key moments that revealed the Russian president‘s current hold over Donald Trump.
The first was in the Oval Office. Sitting alongside Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the US president told reporters: “I don’t think you need a ceasefire.”
Ukraine talks latest: Zelenskyy ‘ready to meet’ Putin after Trump summit
Vladimir Putin shaking hands with Donald Trump when they met last week. Pic: Reuters
It was a stunning illustration of Mr Trump’s about-face in his approach to peace. For the past six months, a ceasefire has been his priority, but after meeting Mr Putin in Alaska, suddenly it’s not.
Confirmation that he now views the war through Moscow’s eyes.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Trump applauds Putin and shares ride in ‘The Beast’ last week
The second was the format itself, with Mr Trump reverting to his favoured ask-what-you-like open-ended Q&A.
In Alaska, Mr Putin wasn’t made to take any questions – most likely, because he didn’t want to. But here, Mr Zelenskyy didn’t have a choice. He was subjected to a barrage of them to see if he’d learnt his lesson from last time.
It was a further demonstration of the special status Mr Trump seems to afford to Mr Putin.
👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈
The third was their phone call. Initially, President Trump said he’d speak to the Kremlin leader after his meeting with European leaders. But it turned out to be during it.
A face-to-face meeting with seven leaders was interrupted for a phone call with one – as if Mr Trump had to check first with Mr Putin, before continuing his discussions.
We still don’t know the full details of the peace proposal that’s being drawn up, but all this strongly suggests that it’s one sketched out by Russia. The White House is providing the paper, but the Kremlin is holding the pen.
Read more:
Four key takeaways from the White House Ukraine summit
Trump has taken peace talks a distance not seen since the war began
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Trump, Zelenskyy and the suit: What happened?
For Moscow, the aim now is to keep Mr Trump on their path to peace, which is settlement first, ceasefire later.
It believes that’s the best way of securing its goals, because it has more leverage so long as the fighting continues.
👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈      
But Mr Putin will be wary that Mr Trump is pliable and can easily change his mind, depending on the last person he spoke to.
So to ensure that his sympathies aren’t swayed, and its red lines remain intact, Russia will be straining to keep its voice heard.
On Monday, for example, the Russian foreign ministry was quick to condemn recent comments from the UK government that it would be ready to send troops to help enforce any ceasefire.
It described the idea as “provocative” and “predatory”.
Moscow is trying to drown out European concerns by portraying itself as the party that wants peace the most, and Kyiv (and Europe) as the obstacle.
But while Mr Zelenskyy has agreed to a trilateral meeting, the Kremlin has not. After the phone call between Mr Putin and Mr Trump, it said the leaders discussed “raising the level of representatives” in the talks between Russia and Ukraine. No confirmation to what level.
World
Trump is playing both sides – but has taken peace talks a distance not seen since the war began
Talks between Donald Trump, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders have taken place at the White House, aimed at finding an end to the war in Ukraine.
On the agenda were US security guarantees, whether a ceasefire is required, and a potential summit between the Ukrainian president and Vladimir Putin.
Zelenskyy ready to meet Putin – follow latest
Here’s what three of our correspondents made of it all.
For Trump
For Mr Trump, the challenge to remain seen as the deal-broker is to maintain “forward momentum, through devilish detail,” Sky News’ US correspondent James Matthews says.
The US president called the Washington summit a “very good early step”, but that’s all it was, Matthews says.
Despite cordiality with Mr Zelenskyy and promising talk of a US role in security guarantees for Ukraine and discussions for meetings to come. Matthews says the obstacles remain.
“Trump has taken peace discussions to a distance not travelled since the start of the war, but it is a road navigated by a president playing both sides who have changed his mind on key priorities.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Zelenskyy, Trump and the suit
For Putin
As for Russia, Sky News’ Moscow correspondent Ivor Bennett says the aim is to keep Trump on its preferred path towards peace – a deal first, a ceasefire later.
“Moscow believes that’s the best way of securing all of its goals,” Bennett says.
But Ukraine and Europe want things the other way round, and Moscow “will be wary that Trump can be easily persuaded by the last person he spoke to”.
And so, Russia will be “trying to keep themselves heard” and “cast Kyiv as the problem, as they won’t agree to a peace deal on the Kremlin’s terms”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What’s Putin’s next move? Sky’s Ivor Bennett explains
For the UK and Europe
Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates says, for Sir Keir Starmer and Europe, the biggest success of the Washington summit was the US promise of security guarantees for Ukraine.
He adds that the “hard work starts now to actually try to figure out what these guarantees amount to”.
Sir Keir said if Vladimir Putin breaches a future peace deal, there would have to be consequences, but Coates said potentially “insoluble” issues stand in the way.
“At what point do those breaches invoke a military response, whether US guarantees would be enough to encourage European involvement in Ukraine, and whether or not you could see the UK and Europe going to war with Russia to protect Ukraine?”
Coates says “there may never be an answer that satisfies everyone involved”.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike