Insider writes about six possible scenarios for the development of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Although itʼs too early to talk about the end of the war, and experts believe that Putin will not stop until victory, the publication sees the following possibilities:
- Cease-fire. If the fighting reaches a stalemate, Russia and Ukraine may agree on a temporary truce. Such a scenario took place between the first and second Chechen wars. Director of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Seth Jones, believes that under such a scenario, Putin will hope for a loss of alliesʼ interest in Ukraine during the armistice.
- A peace agreement. This version of the development of events is possible only if Putin receives something that he can consider a victory ― for example, parts of the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions.
- The victory of the Russian Federation. Since Ukraine has demonstrated the ability to stop the Russian advance, this scenario is unlikely. For Russia, the victory may look more like a peace agreement, which will give it more territories than it had before February 24.
- Victory of Ukraine. Itʼs unlikely that Putin will completely withdraw the troops from the captured territories, so a complete retreat of the Russian Federation is possible only if Putin dies or is removed.
- Protracted war. Some wars can go years without a ceasefire, says Jones. There are now signs that the front will be frozen for the winter, and active hostilities will resume in the spring. However, how long the war will last after that is unknown.
- Nuclear war and/or NATO intervention. The probability of Russiaʼs use of nuclear weapons is low, because for Putin, this step will carry more risks than gains. It is still unknown what could convince NATO to enter the conflict, because it could cause a world war.
The Russian-Ukrainian war can become an impetus for the development of green energy, writes the executive director of the International Energy Agency (IEA), Fatih Birol, in an essay for The Economist. He believes that the energy crisis caused by Russia will change the energy policy in the whole world in the long term. IEA data shows that many countries have already begun to invest more in clean energy technologies. Economic arguments turned out to be more convincing than climate ones: currently, solar and wind power plants are the cheapest energy installations in most countries, writes Birol. Of course, security arguments are also important, because the world has seen the harmful consequences of energy dependence on the Russian Federation. The agency predicts that by 2050, the share of fossil fuels in the worldʼs energy will fall from 80 to 60 percent, though even this will not be enough to avoid the consequences of climate change. Among other challenges Birol sees is the risk of a gap around energy and climate between developed economies and developing countries. To prevent this, Birol suggests three main steps: first, make sure that everyone understands Russiaʼs responsibility in the energy crisis. Second, more developed countries should help developing countries scale up clean energy technologies. Third, rich countries must fulfill their commitments to poorer countries regarding climate finance.
The New York Times writes about the possible role of India in achieving peace in Ukraine. India seeks greater geopolitical influence and has working relations with both Russia and the West. In particular, the country played an important role in the grain agreement, helping to "sell" this plan to Russia. Indian government officials are already discussing a possible role for the state in peacekeeping efforts when there is room for them. According to sources in the Indian government, earlier this year French President Emmanuel Macron proposed the idea of holding talks involving Indian leader Narendra Modi. Center for Asian Studies director Jeff Smitt also believes that India would be a strong candidate to mediate potential talks as a third party. For India, this would mean increasing influence on the world stage and even getting closer to a permanent seat in the UN Security Council, the publication writes.
NPR published a report from the harbor near Istanbul, where experts from the UN, Turkey, Ukraine and Russia are inspecting ships with Ukrainian grain. Here, in the Sea of Marmara, inspections mainly check whether the cargo really contains only grain or grain products. For security reasons, the publicationʼs correspondents were not allowed to photograph or name the Ukrainian and Russian specialists participating in the inspections. As NPR explains, this may irritate the radical sections of society in both countries, which are outraged by the mere fact that somewhere Ukraine and Russia have to cooperate. Journalists visited during the inspection on the ship Tsarevich, noting that the inspection with the participation of Ukrainian and Russian specialists took place in an atmosphere of "professionalism". In the days when Russia withdrew from the "grain agreement" due to strikes on its warships in the Black Sea, the inspection both countries did not work and all the work was done by inspectors of Turkey and the UN, due to which the flow of goods slowed down. It has now recovered, but the agreement expires on November 19, and it is currently unknown whether Russia will continue to participate in it.