The holding of pseudo-referendums in the south-eastern regions of Ukraine occupied by Russia, followed by the initiation of annexation procedures (September 30), shows that Moscow is rapidly losing ground. Otherwise, Russian leader Vladimir Putin would not have initiated partial mobilization and would not have speculated on the possibility of using nuclear weapons. The restoration of Russia’s military potential is going on with difficulties, the troops are physically exhausted and highly demoralized, and the military leadership is making a series of mistakes because it refuses to operate with real information from the ground. The main culprit of the new military losses recorded by the Russian side is Putin. He refuses to accept the reality that Ukraine is moving forward and has broad political and military support from the West to defeat Russian aggression. Although Ukraine is seeking to regain its borders after annexing Crimea in 2014, a Russian defeat would have dramatic consequences for the authoritarian regime in Moscow.

The withdrawal of Russian troops from the occupied territories, recorded in September, is connected with the counteroffensive of Ukrainian troops and the taking control of a large part of the Kharkiv region, followed by the recapture of the city of Lyman in the Donetsk region, and other military successes. This demonstrated that Ukraine has not only resilience, but also increased potential for an effective counteroffensive (100 km2 of land is restored per week in September). So, equipped with a sufficient number of modern weapons and trained according to Western standards, Ukrainian forces can restore the territorial integrity of the country. By the end of September, the USA provided military aid worth 17 billion dollars, and the EU – 2.5 billion euros (in 5 tranches). The Ukrainian side admitted that American missile complexes (HIMERS) changed the dynamics of the war in favor of the Ukrainian counteroffensive. The West promised to provide Ukraine with as much aid as needed.

In the case of Russia, military results are constantly declining. According to some estimates, losses among the Russian military exceed 60,000 people. Also, partial mobilization led to the outflow of more than 200,000 representatives of the male population of Russia (BNE, September 2022). The prospect of becoming “cannon fodder” for aggression against a neighboring country in the form of a dedicated, trained and combat-ready Ukrainian army caused panic among Russian citizens who fled abroad to avoid forced conscription into the Russian army. The Ukrainian leadership advised them to surrender, return to Russia or avoid conscription. Georgia, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Mongolia and Turkey are among the main destinations for Russian men. With the exception of Turkey, travel to the other mentioned countries is visa-free. Not being refugees, Russian men are not entitled to any humanitarian aid. Many of them also tried to enter European countries (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Finland), but faced travel restrictions applied to Russian citizens with tourist visas. The EU is in no hurry to clarify their status and possible facilitation of entry into the Schengen zone. A possible negative reaction is very likely from the member states and Ukraine, about 4 million of whose citizens (as of September 30) are in refugee status abroad (about 10% of the population of 43.4 million in 2021). In addition, the federal budget is losing revenues that were previously provided by the export of hydrocarbons. In August, Russia already recorded a deficit of about 6 billion dollars. The reduction in income puts pressure on military expenses, the need to adapt the economy to the regime of sanctions (import substitution, subsidies, etc.) and, accordingly, on maintaining the stability of the ruble. In the face of weakened military power, the only means Russia has at its disposal, and which it uses or threatens to be able to activate, are the cessation of natural gas supplies and the use of tactical nuclear weapons, respectively.

Consequences of illegal annexation

Despite the fact that significant parts of Kherson Oblast, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk and Luhansk (15% of the territory of Ukraine) are in the process of being absorbed by the Russian state, the illegal act met with a sharp negative reaction. In contrast to the attitude towards the annexation of Crimea in 2014, the position of the EU and the USA regarding the territorial abduction carried out by the regime of Vladimir Putin against Ukraine is much more rigid. If in 2014 the economic sanctions applied by the West were directed against the elites and the business environment of Crimea, now the objects of the sanctions are Russian parliamentarians and officials, the management of large Russian institutions and enterprises. After almost 8 months of Ukrainian defensive war and 7 waves of European sanctions, Western politicians have developed an unprecedented capacity for collective thought and reaction. In any case, US actions regarding Ukraine create expectations for the EU and the G7, which, under the pressure of image costs, are obliged to accelerate or intensify aid.

Russian military aggression against Ukraine has awakened a reflex of courage among European states, which were previously more reluctant and cautious towards Moscow. Ukrainian military successes against the Russian army strengthen the principles and pragmatism of the EU and NATO. The West understands that Russia’s intention to annex the occupied territories of Ukraine creates a dangerous precedent for revising borders with the use of force. Thus, the EU announced new individual and sectoral sanctions (the 8th package), proposed for final discussion on October 6-7 in Prague. Two days after the pseudo-referendums ended, the US imposed individual sanctions against 278 parliamentarians (including Valentina Tereskova, the first female cosmonaut), 14 decision-makers in the military industry, and 3 officials from the financial sector (including Elvira Nabiulina, the Governor of the Central Bank of Russia). .

However, the collective capabilities of the US, the EU, and the G7 are limited in the UN Security Council, where Russia, as a permanent member, blocked a resolution condemning the illegal annexation of Ukrainian territories, supported by China, Gabon, India, and Brazil (5 of the 15 member states rejected the initiative). The conscious arrangement of major world powers on the side of Russia (China, India) requires the West to direct the necessary aid to Ukraine. Thus, the latter is encouraged to reclaim the occupied territories, de facto nullifying Russia’s attempt to change the status quo through illegal annexation upheld by the Russian Constitutional Court.

Three scenarios

Ukrainian forces continue to successfully advance and return new settlements in Kherson Oblast and Donbass to Kyiv’s control. Final victory in the war may take time. Certain radical events in Russia may affect the trajectory of the military situation in Ukraine, directly affecting regional security. Based on the potential of the Ukrainian forces and the limitations of the Russian side, three main scenarios can be distinguished. The deployment of each of them depends on the degree of desperation and, accordingly, the limitation of acceptable options in Putin’s calculations.

“De-occupation” scenario (positive): If Ukraine receives weapons, training and leadership (USA, NATO), as well as financial assistance to support budget expenditures (about 20 billion dollars from the IMF, etc.), then it has the opportunity to regain control over the lost territories. In this case, Russian forces will try to resist, but eventually they will have to retreat to Crimea and Russia, respectively, in order to survive. This scenario would mean that Putin would accept defeat and the loss of the occupied territories he illegally annexed in September 2022. Under such conditions, the Putin regime will be forced to focus its energy and internal resources on protecting against public protests. A positive scenario for Ukraine may even cause an elite coup against Putin. However, Ukraine’s victory will mark the beginning of the end of the rule of the system created by Putin. Thus, it will be possible to reach an agreement on a ceasefire in favor of the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

“Zigzag” scenario (moderate): Russia is resorting to new strikes on civilian infrastructure in Ukraine. In addition, the supply of gas to the EU through pipelines passing through the territory of Ukraine has been suspended. Gas prices in EU countries exceed 3,000 euros per thousand cubic meters, and after anti-government protests and the formation of Eurosceptic governments, unity around certain sanctions may weaken. Also, the shortage of gas on the European market affects supplies to Ukraine. Consequently, economic activity is paralyzed, and the population experiences an acute shortage of energy, which may generate a new wave of refugees (in Moldova and EU countries). The Ukrainian army continues to fight and makes some progress, but progress is more limited due to the cold temperatures and other disadvantages mentioned above. At the same time, Russia is increasing its imports of weapons from Iran and North Korea, trying to compensate for the limited production of its own weapons. In this scenario, the war drags on, but one side does not gain a significant advantage over the other. Ceasefire negotiations are unlikely, as neither side is willing to make concessions. Ukraine is convinced that it can win the war (after numerous successes), and Russia refuses to make concessions so as not to signal weak points that could undermine its authority in the Eurasian space and the Global South (Africa, Asia).

“Nuclear” (negative) scenario: Given the increasingly noticeable loss of positions in the face of an effective counteroffensive by the Ukrainian army, Putin decides to use tactical nuclear weapons, targeting one of the Ukrainian cities liberated from the Russian presence. In order to force negotiations on a ceasefire, the nuclear option cannot be ruled out, although it will lead to a new wave of sanctions and the complete isolation of Russia. According to Putin, in order to avoid a second nuclear strike, Ukraine will be forced to sit down at the negotiating table, which should lead to the recognition of the annexed territories in September 2022. By using nuclear weapons against a country that is not part of NATO’s collective shield, Russia will be convinced that the West will not defend Ukraine in order to avoid mutual nuclear attacks. Such a scenario is possible if Putin feels a real risk of losing power. The survival of his own regime is more important to him than victory over Ukraine. At the same time, the Kremlin conditions (at least for now) the political continuity of the regime on maintaining control over the annexed territories. Read the entire article and comment on Contributors.ro