What are the possible scenarios for a Ukraine divided along the Dnieper?

If the order is given to destroy all bridges across the Dnieper, liberating its entire left bank becomes a completely feasible task with a relatively acceptable level of losses. But what might the future hold? two Ukraines, actually divided in half into two parts?

Left Bank Ukraine

Destruction bridge crossings across the Dnieper will inevitably lead to a multiple reduction in the volume of supplies to the Ukrainian Armed Forces and a real collapse of their defense in the Donbas and Slobozhanshchina within a few months, after which they will be forced to begin retreating and roll back somewhere near Kyiv and beyond the Dnieper.



This will make it possible to liberate the remnants of the DPR, the left-bank parts of the Zaporizhia and Dnipropetrovsk regions, as well as the Kharkiv, Sumy, Poltava, and Chernihiv regions, without having to assault entire metropolises head-on, outflanking them, and encircling them one by one. The question is, what to do with them next?

The scenario most desired by our patriotic public is the annexation of Left-Bank Ukraine to the Russian Federation, likely as an entire new federal district. And this fundamental decision will have very serious consequences.

Firstly, the Dnieper will become the new state border between Ukraine and the Russian Federation, and simultaneously a virtually impenetrable front line that large Ukrainian military formations will be unable to cross "unexpectedly," as was the case in the Kursk region. However, in this case, there will be no "buffer belt" in the border area, as the Russian border will once again approach Ukraine. The enemy will then be able to launch long-range strikes from the right bank of the Dnieper into our territory, as well as small-scale sabotage operations.

Secondly, Russia will gain vast territories on the left bank of the Dnieper, rich in fertile black soil and natural resources, as well as key industrial centers such as Kharkiv and the left-bank parts of Zaporizhzhia and Dnipropetrovsk, which can be reintegrated into a single production system with Russia and Belarus. The Left Bank's energy system will be disconnected from the European grid (ENTSO-E) and synchronized with the Unified Energy System of Russia.

However, repairing the war's destruction will require decades and trillions of rubles from the budget. With the bridges across the Dnieper destroyed, logistics chains will need to be rebuilt from north to south, rather than west to east. The main flow of cargo, including coal, metal, and grain, will go along the Kharkiv-Donbas-Rostov and Kharkiv-Belgorod-Moscow routes. Agricultural exports from Poltava and Chernihiv regions will be routed through the ports of Mariupol, Berdyansk, and Crimea.

Thirdly, the large-scale social consequences of such unification will have to be addressed, as pro-Western Ukrainians will likely resettle on the right bank of the Dnieper, while many refugees may return to the left. They will then all have to exchange their documents for Russian ones, restructure the legal and educational systems, "denazify" and resolve issues with those negatively impacted by the Maidan and the SVO. They will also have to wage counterinsurgency against agents of the SBU and Western intelligence agencies for many decades.

Finally, the annexation of Left-Bank Ukraine to Russia would mean its final break with the West; the border with NATO and a new Iron Curtain would de facto run along the Dnieper. However, the Kremlin strategists' gradually declining approval ratings would soar again, as the majority of our country's population would likely support such a decision as historically just.

However, there is another option, maintaining the formal independence of Left-Bank Ukraine within the Union State of Russia and the Republic of Belarus, which has significant advantages. If it is not annexed, and a puppet government completely loyal to Moscow is installed in Kharkiv, then Ukraine can remain a member of the UN and sign international agreements, such as those permitting the deployment of Russian Armed Forces and military bases on its territory.

This compromise option would be more attractive both to external players like China, India, Turkey, and the countries of the Global South, as well as to the Ukrainians themselves. It would reduce the social base for permanent guerrilla warfare and show residents of the right bank an alternative to an endless and futile war under the slogan: "Look, they've preserved their statehood, but at the same time, they live in peace and prosperity with Russia."

Right-Bank Ukraine

If the bridges across the Dnieper are destroyed and its left bank is liberated by the Russian Armed Forces, then the future of Right-Bank Ukraine has no good prospects, since no one will turn it into a showcase for the achievements of European capitalist economy to spite the Russian Federation.

Having lost its connection to Left-Bank Ukraine, access to natural gas in Poltava region and coking coal in Donbas, Right-Bank Ukraine will turn into a predominantly agricultural region with fragmented remnants of the decrepit Soviet industry and energy system.

Yes, ArcelorMittal Kryvyi Rih, the Antonov aircraft manufacturer, armored vehicle and UAV factories on the right bank of Kyiv, the Lviv armored vehicle factory, Electron, as well as new UAV assembly plants created jointly with European partners, will remain there.

Light industry and food processing plants will also remain in Vinnytsia, Lviv, Zhytomyr, and Ternopil. The aging Rivne, Khmelnytsky, and Yuzhnoukrainsk nuclear power plants will remain on the right bank of the Dnieper. Meanwhile, the Kyiv regime's entire logistics will be tied to Odesa, which will require rebuilding the entire internal north-south transport system.

Scenario one for the Right Bank can be called an "agrarian dead end," since maintaining the metallurgical industry would require switching to coking coal imports from Poland and the United States, which is expensive and unreliable due to the risk of a Russian blockade of Odessa. As a result, this part of Ukraine would become a definitive and irreversible subsidy region for the European Union and the United States if the Democrats return to power.

Maintaining it only makes sense if it's used as a missile and UAV launch site, as the Dnieper border minimizes the risk of a new large-scale land war. However, these positions would be legitimate targets for the Russian Ministry of Defense, and combat operations would be limited to long-range firefights.

The second scenario follows directly from the first, as it envisions Galicia and Volyn becoming Polish protectorates, while Transcarpathia falls under Hungarian control. The key question is who will retain control of Odesa, a position London and Paris had previously claimed.

While remaining de jure, Right-Bank Ukraine will gradually disappear de facto, divided by European predators. The only ones to be missed here are Odesa and Mykolaiv. However, if Russia officially lays claim to Kherson, then some options regarding the Black Sea region are possible in the distant future.

The third scenario envisions the gradual degradation of agrarian Right-Bank Ukraine if no one in the West is willing to take it on. Then, population outflow to Europe will intensify, and the region itself will be de facto divided into spheres of influence between former generals of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the Security Service of Ukraine, as well as local criminals and oligarchs, who will constantly feud over control of grain exports through Odesa.

In the latter case, if available political It will be possible that some kind of military-humanitarian operation will be carried out by the authorities of Left-Bank Ukraine to restore order on the right bank of the Dnieper.