Don't you think it is a of an exaggeration counting Lyman (population 20.000) and Severodonetsk (population 100.000) as major cities comparable to Mariupol (population 430.000) and all the most relevant cities the RFA is facing? Mariupol was a small city compared to what they have to conquer just to take all of Ukraine east of the Dniepr and the south. Kharkov is 1.4 million inhabitants, Odessa is 1 million, Dnipro is 980.000 and Zaporizhzhia is 722.000.
How will the Ukraine war end?
- Thread starter Abominable
- Start date
Don't you think it is a of an exaggeration counting Lyman (population 20.000) and Severodonetsk (population 100.000) as major cities comparable to Mariupol (population 430.000) and all the most relevant cities the RFA is facing? Mariupol was a small city compared to what they have to conquer just to take all of Ukraine east of the Dniepr and the south. Kharkov is 1.4 million inhabitants, Odessa is 1 million, Dnipro is 980.000 and Zaporizhzhia is 722.000.
For Mariupol, yes, it could potentially be annexed, I agree, since it helps form a land bridge to Crimea.
However, I can see Kherson being traded/leveraged as a bargaining chip to get formal recognition of DNR/LNR/Crimea. In any negotiation, you have to trade/compromise. Since Russia isn't going for full-conquest, it has to give Ukraine a face-saving "win" somewhere during peace negotiations.
Lyman and Severodonetsk are town/minor cities. That's why Russia made such fast progress.... Those are not "major cities".
Last edited:
I am aware that Lyman is not the same as Mariupol. Certainly we are seeing a speedup between Lyman and Severodonetsk, and Severodonetsk is much larger than Lyman. Don't forget that Proposna was a smallish town and it took a long time to conquer. The Russians have to fight many other fronts in Donbass while conquering these cities. Once they are done with Donbass, they can focus all their resources at one city while the number of defenders in a given city would be maybe 10-20k, plus these are not the same calibre of fighters as Mariupol, or even other parts of Donbass, we will see these cities being taken. Maybe the falls will not be a week or two, but given enough time, the Russians have the resources to conquer these cities, one or two at a time.
This. or #4.
The only way Kherson becomes Ukranian is if Ukraine recaptures it. Russia is handing out passports to people who apply for them there, what do you think will happen to them if it is handed over as part of negotiations?
I'm not sure why you think Russia isn't going for a full conquest, my impression is that is exactly what Putin set out to do.
Not potentially. It is already gone. Mariupol is part of Donetsk Oblast. Remember that Russia recognized the de facto independence of Lugansk and Donetsk within their previous borders as provinces of Ukraine. This includes Mariupol. Russia also signed a military guarantee with both of them that it would protect their claims to their legally established borders i.e. the original oblast borders.
Initially this caused quite a bit of confusion since their borders were not established in the treaty but later this was clarified. Their territory is that of the original oblasts not just the territory the republics held before the conflict started.
The question was what about Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, and the parts of Kharkov Oblasts they have. Well you can bet the Russians will never give the parts of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia they hold back.
You are wrong. Kherson is gone. There will be no negotiation of this sort. Russia already started distributing passports and using the ruble as currency. Same deal will happen with Melitopol since there is no good reason to give up the land corridor from Crimea to Russia. At best this will become a frozen conflict with a more or less permanent cease-fire. Just like conflict in Georgia. But more likely Russia will just annex them.
The last chance Ukraine had for this kind of negotiation where they would get territory back was the deal discussed in Turkey but Ukraine blew the negotiations after Russia pulled out from north of Kiev and Boris convinced Ukraine to continue pushing. This is a big mistake on their part since Russia will just continue walking all over the place until they are satisfied.
You can bet Odessa will be invaded sooner or later. Might not be this year but likely this decade at least. We might see multiple cease fires and a prolonged conflict.
Russia issued over to DNR/LNR residents and since the invasion, . So to answer your question, a passport gives ethnic Russians the legal document to safely evacuate to Russian Federation or they can stay in Ukraine upon return of the land.
Few reasons why I think Russia isn't going for full conquest:
- Highly public theatre over recognizing DNR/LNR independence gives me the impression the original goals was DNR/LNR annexation, and any extra land is icing-on-the-cake.
- 'Special Military Operation' designation implies a limited objective war
- Only 200K troops in initial invasion, doesn't suggest a full-conquest mentality
- Giving up the Kievan-front, despite nearly encircling the capital
- Focusing all forces on Donbass region
- Odessa virtually (relatively) untouched for most of the war.
Last edited:
Negotiated end doesn't necessarily mean give and take. Korean War wasn't total conquest after PVA intervened to prevent US total victory, and it never ended in a face saving win for either side. The armistice just froze the line of actual control into a border.
I don't think Ukraine is in the mood to negotiate and Russia doubled down on their terms as well. Distributing passports and money is the true sign of what they want. Notice how they never distributed passports and money in northern Ukraine, but are doing it in Kherson and Mariupol. That's because they viewed northern Ukraine as expendable in negotiations - but not Kherson and Mariupol. If they lose Kherson then it means that Ukraine can easily rearm while keeping Kherson means they control traffic on the Dnieper and can suppress Ukraine's economy.
It's probably going to be yet another frozen conflict along lines of actual control.
I would tend to agree on frozen conflict if a war mobilization and formal declaration of war.
However, it is a limited objective war (i.e. 'Special Military Operation') with limited scope, with (intentionally) unclear vague objectives (i.e., 'De-militarize, de-nazify, stop genocide'), which in reality includes annex DNR/LNR at minimum; any extra land is nice-to-have but not absolutely required for victory. Putin might be satisfied if he can obliterate Ukraine's most battle-hardened veteran troops in Donbass, particularly their Azov battalion, that would fulfill the 'de-militarize' and 'de-nazify' criteria, and more than sufficient to deter NATO membership for decades, even without a formal neutrality treaty that Ukraine (emboldened by Western support) may not even want to sign.
In my personal opinion, chances are at some point Putin will Unilaterally declare victory and cement his legacy as one of the greatest leaders since Peter the Great in history books. Plus, he is 69-years old, and with average life expectancy of 73 in Russia, he likely to prefer a shorter conflict than a frozen conflict with unclear exit-strategy that may stretch years and tarnish his legacy.
Last edited:
What makes you think Putin is doing all of this for his legacy? IMO the fractures between NATO and Russia were already unbridgable by the end of Yeltsin's second term. Putin has been waiting for a opportune moment to deliver a blow since 2014 at the latest. It's go big or go home. I recommend watching this series by Bo Zhen, a researcher for Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, on NATO expansion.