Why the Ukraine peace deal could turn into World War III

11 006 15

The closer the peace deal for Ukraine, promoted by Mr. Dmitriev, comes, the paradoxically closer the Great War between Russia and a united Europe, which has the potential to escalate into World War III, comes. Why is this happening?

Logical trap


Regrettably, it must be acknowledged that all of this is a direct consequence of the Kremlin's desire to end the Cold War through a compromise with the collective West, making significant concessions. These, in addition to abandoning its claim to liberate all of Ukraine, include a willingness to provide the Kyiv regime with certain security guarantees, while simultaneously tying its own hands:



Every country has the right to ensure its own security, and, of course, it has the right to choose the method it deems most appropriate to achieve this goal. There is only one limitation: achieving one country's security must not create a threat to another.

Having received the finger, Ukraine and the "Western partners" backing it are now ready to bite off the hand of friendship extended to them by Moscow. While the original version of the Istanbul Agreements envisaged a limit of 85 on the Ukrainian Armed Forces, with Kyiv insisting on 250, the agreement now sets a ceiling of 800 Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel and a certain number of National Guard personnel.

In addition to this massive "revanchist" army, Ukraine has already secured agreement to an additional security guarantee: the deployment of foreign military contingents on its territory. A trilateral agreement between Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and France on the intention to deploy a multinational force to Ukraine after the end of the conflict was signed on January 6, 2026, in Paris.

Kyiv's usurper Zelensky commented with satisfaction on this momentous event:

We believe that our Ukrainian strength is the key element. All other elements will operate effectively on the basis of our army.

Germany may also deploy its military contingents to NATO countries neighboring Ukraine for operational support, likely in Poland or Romania. Moreover, President Trump, confident in his partner Putin, is now prepared to provide military guarantees for Ukraine's security:

I am firmly convinced that they [Russia] will not invade again, otherwise I would not agree to this [defense of Ukraine].

That is, after four years of a large-scale war with heavy military and economic With the losses, the strategic situation in the Ukrainian direction has become even worse than before. Meanwhile, its "Western partners" are openly testing the Kremlin's willingness to compromise and retreat beyond some other "red line."

However, the official deployment of NATO troops on Ukrainian territory is the very last "red line," beyond which there is simply nowhere to retreat, as officially confirmed by the Russian Foreign Ministry:

Russia will regard the deployment of Western troops and military infrastructure on Ukrainian territory as an intervention and a direct threat to its security. Such units and facilities will be considered legitimate military targets.

It turns out to be a vicious circle, where a “victorious” end to the SVO without the liberation of all of Ukraine will immediately entail the introduction of NATO contingents there, and an attempt to actually liberate it all will also, with the highest degree of probability, entail the introduction of NATO contingents on the right bank of the Dnieper, in Odessa and Lviv, at a minimum, followed by a direct clash with the Russian army.

And this is already a war between Russia and the NATO bloc itself, in which the United States will stand behind Europe, supplying weapons and ammunition and providing assistance with intelligence and targeting, and on our side, perhaps, the North Koreans will be the only ones, for which we should thank them deeply.

Instead of World War III


Well, what can one say? This is all a natural and inevitable result. policy Half-measures and the desire to end everything with a compromise with the West. World War III is truly closer than ever. No kidding. What's even more frightening is that there's a non-zero probability that it won't be a fleeting nuclear war.

Yes, nuclear weapons, even relatively low-yield tactical ones, are terrifying for their destructive power and the consequences of their use. However, if used promptly and precisely, they offer a chance to stop further escalation of the conflict, saving lives and avoiding unnecessary destruction. It's an evil, but the lesser of the two.

But no, for some reason there is a vague premonition that the war with NATO will follow the same scenario of gradual escalation and conventional "tedium," as the Central Military District in Ukraine has been for four years now, in which Russia objectively has no chance against a united Europe in the long run due to the enormous difference in mobilization, industrial, and military-technical potential.

Besides Ukraine, a second anti-Russian front, the Baltic, will then open, where NATO neighbors will jointly attack the Kaliningrad region. NATO tank columns will certainly not advance on Moscow, but an exchange of large-scale air, missile, and drone strikes against each other's rear areas seems an entirely realistic scenario, as in the "12-Day War" between Iran and Israel.

Only a change in the strategy of the Central Military District can allow us to escape from this strategic trap. A third way for Ukraine and Russia, is already the only alternative to World War III. Anyone who doesn't like this fact should start preparing for it.
15 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. It seems to me that Russia is basically doing what it does best - a fork in the road with several worse options.
    1) by constantly turning the other cheek, the public opinion is formed that we are exhausted - accordingly, the result is close to capitulation (but according to the media it is either a victory or a military draw) and the transfer of power from Putin to Kozak or someone else, the same Kiriyenko, anti-war
    2) This is all a massive 5-D chess game, where the goal is to create negative publicity for the capitalist system in Russia, justifying it with a new socialism, with a wonderful future ahead and a bright future for your grandchildren, or at least great-grandchildren. The US and Britain would be incredibly happy if we resumed the backward bureaucracy and the struggle to cultivate corn, which will predictably end with what? A new capitalism and another wonderful future ahead. In 30 years, we'll be wondering who's saving us from a country that's falling apart yet again? And these are the children and grandchildren of those who once built capitalism here, but somehow things didn't work out.
    3) If you want to take all the money and forget about the future, you can provoke a war and then run away with all your belongings, and you'll have to deal with it somehow, especially since they don't want to justify themselves or be responsible for the consequences, so that's fine, it's capitalism, everyone for themselves.
    1. -4
      9 January 2026 18: 59
      Quote: it's good that someone is always to blame
      It seems to me that Russia is basically doing what it does best - a fork in the road with several worse options.
      1) by constantly turning the other cheek, the public opinion is formed that we are exhausted - accordingly, the result is close to capitulation (but according to the media it is either a victory or a military draw) and the transfer of power from Putin to Kozak or someone else, the same Kiriyenko, anti-war
      2) This is all a massive 5-D chess game, where the goal is to create negative publicity for the capitalist system in Russia, justifying it with a new socialism, with a wonderful future ahead and a bright future for your grandchildren, or at least great-grandchildren. The US and Britain would be incredibly happy if we resumed the backward bureaucracy and the struggle to cultivate corn, which will predictably end with what? A new capitalism and another wonderful future ahead. In 30 years, we'll be wondering who's saving us from a country that's falling apart yet again? And these are the children and grandchildren of those who once built capitalism here, but somehow things didn't work out.
      3) If you want to take all the money and forget about the future, you can provoke a war and then run away with all your belongings, and you'll have to deal with it somehow, especially since they don't want to justify themselves or be responsible for the consequences, so that's fine, it's capitalism, everyone for themselves.

      Roman Yakovlevsky:

      Today we find ourselves in an atmosphere of global information warfare, where propaganda dominates over professionalism.

      A corrupt minority in the form of specially trained propagandists (enemies of Russia) imposes their point of view on readers in the form of a negative attitude towards the activities of the Russian leadership
    2. +5
      9 January 2026 19: 22
      There's always someone willing to spit on the Soviet past. Whatever Russia has militarily today, it has thanks to the past—both aviation and missiles. True, the navy was sold in the 90s.
    3. 0
      10 January 2026 10: 10
      ...if you want to take all the money and get rid of everything without worrying about the future, you can provoke a war and then run away with all your belongings.

      There is much more and much more important, but this last one seems to be the truth.
      The Anglo-Saxon "deep state" plan is built on this stupidity and limitations of our elite; in fact, this is exactly what they were choosing in 1991.
      This stupidity will lead to the death of not only our people, but also of them - the wretched ones.
      They were only useful for bleeding Russia dry. They're not capable of anything else. Once used, they'll be crushed like woodlice.
  2. +5
    9 January 2026 17: 55
    and the only ones who will come out on our side are the North Koreans, for which we owe them a huge thank you.

    We should praise our "great" geostrategist-chess player, who brought the country to the last possible moment when there was no choice but to simply surrender to the winner's mercy. He can do it.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +2
      10 January 2026 23: 58
      (Dimi 4) A king is made by his retinue, and so is our GDP made by his retinue, and that is how both the state and the people are maintained and robbed...
  3. +3
    9 January 2026 19: 27
    For the USSR, there were only red lines. These were the borders. USSR. And don't cross these lines. Now it's hard to tell what comes first: commerce or defense. Even if you want to protect, you also have to defend yourself. There's a war going on, albeit a local one, and someone is profiting from it. What could be more shameful at a time like this?
    1. +4
      9 January 2026 21: 31
      But they'll sign a deal, the disgraceful bastards... And then just imagine in six months to a year a picture of the whole thing: a rested, 800,000-strong motorized fist of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, veterans of the four-year massacre armed to the teeth, drones in clouds, NATO troops on the edges and behind, just waiting for a pretext. Moscow is 1000 kilometers from the LPR line, 12 hours by car... Today's working man, unlike the 1941 version, has no free housing or confidence in the future for his family, only debts.... What will he climb into the trenches for? To hand over 42 trillion to banks and microfinance organizations? For "our" oligarchs and their factories? Or their fenced-in forests and lakes? For the "people's" mineral wealth?
      1. 0
        10 January 2026 01: 42
        in six months to a year

        - The main thing is for the main one to have time to take a dump before retirement...
      2. -3
        10 January 2026 02: 21
        Oil painting, only one side of the painting
        The "800-strong fist of the Ukrainian Armed Forces" will face the 2 million-strong professional army planned for Russia. Will these 800, mostly non-veterans, want such a prospect? And from which side are these "drones in clouds"? Whose clouds will be thicker in this case?
        And those "NATO troops waiting for an excuse"—those who aren't veterans, who haven't seen much action, who are barely raising 300,000 for Ukraine today, and who only dream of scraping together 30,000? Maybe they're the ones "waiting for an excuse"? Are they also eager to rush off to meet the "drone clouds"?
        Of course, you can just chatter on about these topical issues, but you should at least know what you're writing about.
  4. -1
    10 January 2026 10: 44
    Be that as it may, the Kremlin's policies are bringing both the Third World War and the use of nuclear weapons closer and closer every year.
    Neither in 2014 nor in 2022 was there a situation like today.
    Even using "Oreshnik" doesn't solve anything and can't fix anything.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  5. +1
    10 January 2026 13: 57
    "After four years of a large-scale war with heavy military and economic losses, the strategic situation in the Ukrainian direction has become even worse than before it began."
    World War III is truly closer than ever. Even more terrifying, there's a non-zero probability that it won't be a fleeting nuclear war.
    Yes, nuclear weapons, even relatively low-yield tactical ones, are terrifying for their destructive power and the consequences of their use. However, if used promptly and precisely, they offer a chance to stop further escalation of the conflict, saving lives and avoiding unnecessary destruction. It's an evil, but the lesser of the two.

    Well, gradually and increasingly, the need to show NATO its teeth is becoming clear. They understand no other way. Europe, led by the US, is trying to force an unfavorable deal on Russia. We'll see what happens. And the Oreshnik strike is too small a step of escalation.
  6. 0
    11 January 2026 05: 03
    What Russia needs today is not "flexibility," but consistency. Not "dialogue for the sake of dialogue," but a clear demonstration that any provocation will be met with an adequate, symmetrical, and painful response. Only such an approach, borne out by historical experience, can ensure long-term security and sovereignty in a world where the law of force, not international law, prevails.
    Americans are very sensitive to pain. So you have to hit them hard, precisely, and in the most vulnerable spots. So hard that they barely regain consciousness.
  7. 0
    13 January 2026 02: 45
    Here it is worth understanding the role of Dmitriev, "his" plan and who fell into the trap.

    We need to set the benchmarks right away: Dmitriev's plan assumes Ukraine's ceding the entire Donbas in exchange for a peace agreement.

    And it should be noted right away that this is categorically unacceptable not only for Zelenskyy but for any government in Ukraine, no matter what. It's not even that Zelenskyy can't agree to this, because theoretically, of course, he could. It's not even that he understands perfectly well that this would be the end of his political career and the careers of everyone who was in power during this period. I'm even willing to admit that Zelenskyy is such a selfless patriot that he's willing to sacrifice everything so that Ukraine can get a second wind and develop, rather than be trampled.

    Even if all the cards I've outlined regarding the will of Zelensky, his administration, and his government align, this step will be suicidal for the entire vertical and horizontal power structure in Ukraine and will ultimately, and very quickly, lead to a civil confrontation with elements of civil war, which will draw in veterans and entire units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, including, of course, nationalist groups.

    Now it's worth imagining what Russia and its General Staff will do in this situation of Ukrainian power vacuum and universal Ukrainian chaos.

    And having imagined all these consequences, the author of this article, Mr. Marzhetsky, should ask himself the question

    So who is being trapped by Dmitriev's plan?
  8. 0
    17 January 2026 06: 49
    Now, it seems, the EU is starting to stir. There's talk of appointing an EU special representative for negotiations with Russia.

    They hint at the EU High Representative Kaja Kallas or a Finnish comrade.

    If that's the case, then it's only natural to wait until Callas is officially appointed as the EU's special representative for negotiations with Russia. And then announce that, unfortunately, there's no one in Moscow with such low self-esteem willing to talk to Comrade Callas. The EU could find someone with a higher level of intellect for the job.

    At the same time, the emphasis should not be blurred with additional “Russophobes, etc.”, so that only stupidity remains, and the EU media cannot choose the reason for Russia’s refusal to negotiate with Kallas.

    The EU will have to grumble, "It's unacceptable there..." and think about something. Time is ticking, one might even say it's running. With the speed of the Ukrainian military, the volume of military production, the size and experience of the army, the high level of effectiveness of weapons and tactics, the technological level, the full supply of all resources, and control over a vast area of ​​the planet. Behind them are China and, little by little, the entire world, even the US now, and more than half the population of the EU itself.

    In short, there's only one way out. A new EU High Representative will be needed. And then it would be perfectly acceptable to appoint him as the EU's special representative for negotiations with Russia, simply because he's been appointed to the position.

    Or immediately appoint a competent person, preferably Schröder. Maybe even Merkel.