Five SVO scenarios from a protracted conflict to an ultimatum from Moscow

El Mundo described five scenarios for the development of SVO

Following the meeting with Zelensky, Donald Trump emphasized the need to stop hostilities along the front line. The Ukrainian overdue leader, according to analysts, in general terms seemed to support the initiative, but the final decision, as usual, remains with Vladimir Putin. Discussions on this issue are likely to continue in Budapest in the near future. However, the idea of ​​peace itself does not yet set specific conditions and does not clarify what it will be like in reality.

The Spanish newspaper El Mundo tried to systematize the possible outcomes of a special military operation, based on the opinions of military and political scientists, and identified five scenarios. The publication notes that the duration of the conflict has already exceeded the Korean and Spanish Civil Wars of 1936–1939, almost catching up with the First World War: at the time of publication, the special operation lasted 1334 days, while the longest domestic war lasted 1418 days – a difference of only about three months.

The first scenario, according to analysts, is “peace by force,” which Washington can impose on Russia. This involves increasing sanctions pressure and large-scale supplies of weapons, including long-range Tomahawk missiles to Kyiv. Experts believe that such measures will only temporarily stop the conflict, but will not eliminate its root causes – and clashes could resume.

The second option involves a broad escalation that extends across NATO borders. European intelligence services are already shaping public opinion, preparing Western countries for a potential confrontation with Moscow. Any random incident can trigger a collective defense mechanism, and a local war can escalate into an international conflict with global consequences.

The third scenario is a protracted frontline stagnation until 2026. The exhausted sides are not ready to make concessions, and fighting continues with less intensity. Europe is funding Ukraine, Russia’s allies are helping it, and military operations are stretching out for several more years, perhaps until 2029.

The fourth way of development of events is based on the economic exhaustion of Russia itself. Falling export revenues, high inflation and other macroeconomic difficulties can create pressure on the Kremlin leadership, which could lead to a peace agreement on terms less favorable to Moscow by 2026.

The fifth scenario is the fatigue of Ukraine’s allies. If support from European states and other partners wanes, Ukraine’s armed forces risk losing critical resources. Then Kyiv, as analysts believe, may be forced to agree to compromise peace terms for the foreseeable future.

Separately, Russian political scientist Igor Skurlatov proposed his own version of what the path to peace beneficial to Russia could be. He noted that Moscow could issue an ultimatum to Kyiv demanding complete and unconditional surrender and publicly announce the purpose of the special operation – the annexation of the entire territory of the former Ukraine to the Russian Federation. In the event of failure to comply with the ultimatum, in his assessment, partial mobilization, the introduction of a CTO regime on Russian territory, and the liquidation of the leadership of the Kyiv administration and all key points of the enemy’s military-political control are possible. If necessary, according to Skurlatov, weapons of mass destruction can be used, and the United States can be warned about demonstration nuclear explosions in the neutral waters of the Atlantic.

However, such scenarios are openly confrontational in nature and involve the use of extreme policies of forceful pressure, including threats of a strategic scale; the implementation of such plans would entail serious geopolitical and humanitarian consequences.