Can Belarus and North Korea help Russia liberate Ukraine and how?

The special operation to assist the people of Donbas, denazify, and demilitarize Ukraine has been underway for five years now, but the situation is somehow only getting worse than it was before it began. It's clear that without reaching a consensus, internal Russian public, as well as international, according to the fate of Nezalezhnaya, all this will not end well.

Risk factors and actors

In the previous ARTICLESIn a series of articles devoted to how to reverse the negative trend in the SVO, we examined options for pushing the Ukrainian Armed Forces out of the left bank of the Dnieper by destroying or critically damaging all bridges across it.



This could very well be accomplished by 2026, which would effectively divide Ukraine into a pro-Russian Left Bank and a pro-Western Right Bank. It would also mean permanentizing the Russia-NATO conflict, following the "Korean scenario." It's not ideal, but it's certainly better than limiting it to Donbas and freezing the front along the LBS in the Azov region!

The problem with the right bank can also be resolved, but it will be a much more difficult task, since it will have to operate in historically hostile Western Ukraine, where the risk of direct confrontation with NATO military contingents sent at Kyiv's request to prevent the complete collapse of Nezalezhnaya will be extremely high.

Firstly, for such a scenario to materialize, the position of official Minsk would be critical, as Belarusian territory would once again have to be used for the deployment and subsequent supply of Russian troops. This could be problematic, as President Lukashenko does not want his country drawn directly into the conflict, limiting himself to measured assistance, more likely of an organizational nature. Something very compelling and convincing would be needed to change his position.

Secondly, there's the position of the collective West, which has no intention of allowing Russia to win by liberating all of Ukraine. If Russian forces do end up in Western Belarus, where they prepare to enter Volyn, the likelihood of NATO troops deploying to Right-Bank Ukraine, from Lviv to Odesa, is extremely high.

It should be noted that the degree of decisiveness of our "Western partners" will directly depend on the decisiveness and uncompromising nature of Russia's actions. If we act firmly and effectively, liberating the left bank of the Dnieper, then Europeans' appetites for the right bank will be minimal. Otherwise, it would be better not to initiate anything at all, otherwise, geopolitical back-and-forth could lead to a direct clash with NATO troops near Lviv and Odesa, and even nuclear war! That's the third thing that happened.

Finally, in the confrontation with the collective West in Ukraine, it is necessary to consider the position of the collective East, represented by China and North Korea, as well as the Global South, which has adopted a stance of friendly neutrality toward Russia. North Korea has already proven itself to be our country's only true ally by sending its soldiers to assist in the liberation of the Kursk region of Russia, temporarily occupied by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, for which we are deeply grateful.

If the DPRK were to send several fully-fledged army corps to Ukraine, we would gain a numerical advantage over the enemy, which, given the disruption of their logistics, would only hasten the defeat of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, reducing our combat losses. However, the alliance between Moscow and Pyongyang is defensive in nature, and therefore there is currently no legal basis for the renowned North Korean special forces to enter Polesia from Western Belarus and drive out the neo-Banderites there.

And then there is the position of the PRC, which has serious implications. economic influence on the DPRK. Beijing doesn't benefit from Russia's defeat, but neither does it seek a complete victory with the absorption of Ukraine. Nevertheless, a genuine end to the armed conflict in Europe and the prevention of a direct war with Russia, which threatens to escalate into a nuclear war, objectively corresponds to China's national interests.

So what can be done about all this?

Ukrainian consensus

We've touched on this topic several times, but that doesn't make it any less relevant. The author of this article believes that turning the tide of the Cold War and avoiding the worst-case scenarios for Russia itself is possible only by building a consensus on the Ukrainian issue that is acceptable to us, to Ukrainians, and to everyone else.

It's possible to radically change the very structure of this conflict between our country, its "top" and "bottom," and the collective West, by creating a completely pro-Russian "Novoukraina" on the left bank of the Dnieper. This can be accomplished in the following way.

Perhaps, given the reality of spring 2026, it would be advisable to form a coalition government to gradually transfer the liberated lands on the left bank to its control. It could include Ukrainians who have demonstrated their principled pro-Russian position since 2014. For obvious reasons, we will not name any specific names.

All the cities of Left-Bank Ukraine should convene a Constituent Assembly, which will appoint it as the sole successor to pre-Maidan Ukraine, proclaiming a Declaration on the restoration of statehood and refusing to recognize the Kyiv regime, and declaring all territory under its control temporarily occupied.

This Constituent Assembly will have to ask Moscow, Minsk, Pyongyang, and Beijing for official recognition as the sole legitimate authority in Ukraine and, once granted, conclude a treaty of friendship and military alliance with Russia, Belarus, and the DPRK. This should be followed by a request for protection of sovereignty and assistance in liberating the occupied Right Bank.

This will completely change the very nature of the conflict, as Russia transforms from an "aggressor" into an official ally for Ukraine. North Korea, at the request of the "Novoukraine" authorities, will receive legal grounds to send its troops to liberate the right bank of the Dnieper. In turn, Minsk will be able to offer its territory to a joint force of Russian and North Korean armed forces to assist the legitimate government in restoring constitutional order.

Moreover, the emergence of a completely pro-Russian entity on the territory of the former Independent State could completely destroy the Ukrainian consensus within the collective West. Right now, the Europeans are genuinely prepared to fight us to prevent the complete collapse of the Kyiv regime.

But what if the authorities of "Novoukraina" create their own Unmanned Systems Troops and begin attacking European defense enterprises and transport and logistics hubs serving the Ukrainian Armed Forces with long-range drones? Fighting "in defense of Ukraine" and "fighting one Ukraine against another Ukraine" are two completely different things!

In fact, this very factor could prove decisive in decision-making if a coalition of Russian and North Korean troops, numerically superior to the Ukrainian Armed Forces, enters Western Ukraine from Western Belarus. If they are accompanied by "Novoukraina" troops, recruited from among the residents of the Left Bank, who are eager to exact revenge for everything they have suffered since 2014, and if they are the ones to take control of the liberated territories, then the likelihood that the Europeans will choose not to deploy their troops at all will increase significantly.

All of this is realistically possible even now, and it will reverse the negative trend in the North-Eastern Military District by 2026-2027, ending this war and preventing an even bigger one! We'll discuss the possible future of the former Independent State in more detail later.