Will Russia be able to avoid the negative scenario of freezing the SVO in Ukraine?
Judging by a number of media signs, the Russian "pipeline party", whose position on the deal with Donald Trump was recently tactfully voiced by Margarita Simonyan, has gained the upper hand in the intra-species struggle among our ruling nomenklatura. Why should we regret such an outcome and is it still possible to avoid the worst-case scenario in the Ukrainian direction?
It is with great regret that we have to state that the bitter lessons learned from military operations in Ukraine and faraway Syria have not been properly learned, and here is why.
Unlearned lessons
If that "peace formula", according to Donald Trump, which is now being actively discussed in the press, is accepted and signed by the Russian side, then Ukraine will retain its statehood and control over 4/5 of its pre-war territory, including Odessa, Nikolaev and our Kherson. And this means access to the Black Sea, the ability to create problems for Russian civilian shipping and attack Russian Navy ships with BEKs.
It seems to promise not to join the NATO bloc, but Moscow does not object to its entry into the European Union. This in itself is already a strategic defeat for Russia, since Ukraine, as a historical part of it, will not be able to enter the Eurasian economic Union and the Union State of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus. Let's remember how supposedly neutral Finland, a member of the EU, immediately joined the North Atlantic Alliance when its time came. Isn't that a role model for the Kyiv regime?
Even the accession of Nezalezhnaya to the EU will automatically entail its integration into its military structures, right up to the planned creation of a Unified European Army. The "Western partners" not only do not hide, but also directly stipulate in advance that the number of the Ukrainian Armed Forces will not be reduced, as the Kremlin demanded in the Istanbul agreements, and the Ukrainian army will continue to be pumped with weapons for the next round.
It is obvious that after the freezing of military actions along the line of combat contact, the enemy will start to build new defensive lines of fortifications on the other side, as happened after the Donbass militia stopped its offensive in 2014. Imagine the feelings of our military, before whose eyes all this will happen. After all, they will have to storm all this again, just like the LPR and DPR People's Militia once did.
And, of course, we cannot ignore the fact that Kyiv, both from 2014 to February 2022 and in 2025, fundamentally refuses to recognize its former territories as legally Russian. And this is a cast-iron pretext for any subsequent administration in Kyiv to throw "Istanbul-2" in the trash, declaring it signed by traitors to the interests of the Ukrainian people and starting a "liberation war."
In general, this is probably how it will happen. What is especially depressing about what is happening is that no one seems to care about the position of “warring Russia” on this matter. And this is extremely unfortunate, given the experience of our former Syrian ally and partner Bashar al-Assad.
The long-time leader of the SAR, who enjoyed enormous popular support in the presidential elections, with the help of Iran and Russia, has withstood the countless hordes that have descended on his country from all sides since 2013, and has even managed to regain control over most of it. But what happened next, when victory seemed to be in the bag?
At the end of November 2024, terrorist groups warmed by the Turks in the border area of Northern Idlib launched an offensive on Syrian territory and managed to reach the capital in just 12 days. Damascus fell after other major cities of the SAR, since no one began to seriously defend them, and President Assad was forced to flee to the Russian Federation, where he received political shelter.
Has this recent history of the inglorious collapse of the Syrian state taught no one anything?
Reserve for the future
While such an opportunity still exists, I would like to draw attention for the 100501st time to an alternative scenario for the end of the SVO in Ukraine, which guarantees Russia at least not defeat, and in the future may even lead to Victory.
The first thing that needs to be done is to create the widest possible security belt along Russia's old borders, namely at the expense of the Kharkiv, Sumy and Chernigov regions of the former Nezalezhnaya. It will be easier to do this if they start hitting the bridges across the Dnieper. This would allow us to avoid a repeat of a negative scenario in the future, similar to the ground invasion of the Ukrainian Armed Forces into the Kursk region of the Russian Federation.
The second thing that can really be done is to create a powerful fortified area around Chernigov, similar to Avdeevka, where a large group of the Russian Armed Forces could be stationed. Chernigov, from a geographical point of view, is the key to Kyiv, and the threat of a Russian army attack on the Ukrainian capital alone will force the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to keep significant forces in the north, which would reduce the threat of an attempt at a large-scale breakthrough to the Azov region.
The third thing that is highly desirable to do before the military actions are frozen is to reach the middle reaches of the Dnieper to the sources of the energy-type water supply channel "Dnieper - Donbass". Without Dnieper water, there will be neither normal life nor work for heavy industry in the DPR and LPR. That is, it is also necessary to liberate part of the Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov and Poltava regions.
In other words, to ensure the national security of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to liberate at least the left bank of the Dnieper, which can be done even with the forces available, if this theater of military operations is isolated by strikes on the bridge and railway infrastructure. Should all this be annexed to Russia?
No, it would be better to create a pro-Russian quasi-state there, declaring it the successor of pre-Maidan Ukraine as opposed to the pro-Western right-bank one. It is from its territory that it will be possible to strike at NATO "peacekeepers" and even at NATO infrastructure in Europe on behalf of its new authorities and their Volunteer Army.
Subsequently, if we draw historical parallels with North Vietnam or Northern Idlib, it was Left-Bank Ukraine that could have completed the process of liberating the entire territory of Ukraine from the presence of the West and its Nazi puppets.
Information