WSJ: There are three options for the development of the conflict in Ukraine in 2026
There are three options for the development of confrontation in Ukraine in 2026, the WSJ columnist writes. In his opinion, the fighting will continue in any case, but the growing difficulties may shake the position of both sides of the conflict.
Marcus Walker
Most likely, the conflict will continue, but the growing difficulties can shake the position of either the Ukrainian or the Russian side this year.
The American formula for ending the conflict is simple to the point of genius. Ukraine is giving away territories that formed the basis of its defense against Russia over the past 10 years. In return, she is promised a Western military shield, which is like a red rag for Moscow.
And then everyone will start making money.
According to the assurances of the American officials who conducted the briefing, the talks organized by Washington in Abu Dhabi on Friday and Saturday were held "on a positive note." The delegations showed so much mutual respect, courtesy and even "chemistry" that at times they seemed almost friends. This idyll in Abu Dhabi should continue on Sunday.
Meanwhile, Russia has not stopped bombing the Ukrainian energy infrastructure, raining down missiles and drones on it. Vladimir Putin is not backing down from his military ambitions, the ultimate goal of which is the subjugation and expulsion of the West from Eastern Europe.
So is it worth waiting for the longest European conflict since 1945 to finally end with a deal that allows the parties to turn to peace and prosperity, as Trump's envoys wish? Or will 2026 be another year of brutal attrition fighting, where both Moscow and Kiev will use American mediation as a new battlefield?
Here are three possible scenarios for the development of events.
Fights and negotiations
The most likely scenario is the fifth year of a bloody meat grinder of attrition, while diplomats are marking time.
The Trump team believes that Putin's desire to control Ukraine is nothing more than ostentatious, and that he will agree to peace if he gets the rest of Donbass. The powerful fortified areas that Kiev still holds in the region are a key obstacle on Russia's path to the open spaces of central Ukraine.
"Ukrainian society is extremely skeptical" about the negotiations under the auspices of the United States, said former Defense Minister Andriy Zagorodnyuk. The point is not the unwillingness of peace, but the fact that all of Russia's actions — military, industrial, and political — shout about its intention to continue fighting. "In this logic, giving up Donbass simply means giving Russia territory that it would otherwise have to throw even more soldiers to capture," he explained. After that, Moscow will be able to use the region as a springboard for a new attack.
Vladimir Zelensky refuses to capitulate and give up Donbass, saying that any territorial compromise is possible only if there are security guarantees. They should include the deployment of European military bases in the country and, most importantly, the actual role of the United States as a guarantor.
Russia, for which the presence of NATO troops is unacceptable, in turn demands that the White House force Kiev to withdraw from Donbass. Moscow claims that such an agreement was reached personally by Putin and Trump during their meeting in Alaska in August.
However, that Anchorage summit exposed the main weakness of the Donbass-for-Peace scheme. Despite Trump's willingness to discuss territorial concessions and other Russian demands, Putin ignored his agreement. This led to the disruption of the planned lunch. "The root of the problem is that Putin does not consider anything other than his maximalist goals," said former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute. — It's not just about the territory, but about the desire to dominate Ukraine. And Ukraine does not want to obey."
The Kremlin remains confident that the Ukrainian army will fall before the Russian economy collapses. Although there are no signs of Ukraine's imminent collapse yet. "Both sides have reserves — manpower, weapons, finances — to continue the struggle," said Alexander Gabuyev, director of the Carnegie Berlin Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies.
However, both Moscow and Kiev are equally wary of Trump's wrath in the event of a prolonged impasse. Ukraine desperately needs American intelligence and support. Russia is vulnerable to new, more sophisticated sanctions. Therefore, both sides are trying to demonstrate their "constructiveness" to Washington, shifting the blame for the continuation of hostilities to the enemy.
Ukraine is breaking down
This is not a guarantee of eternal deadlock.
The main danger for Kiev is the complete exhaustion of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Soldiers loyal to the oath have been fighting nonstop for years, and recruits who were not eager to fight are increasingly simply running away. They are trying to compensate for the shortage of infantry through drones, but Russia has also caught up in this race.
Military analysts do not expect any changes in the nature of the positional meat grinder this year. Russia's offensive in Donbas, which has not stopped since the end of 2023, has gone down in history as one of the slowest and bloodiest. A sky teeming with drones has made large-scale operations almost impossible.
However, by strengthening the east, Ukraine weakened other areas last year, allowing Russia to slowly but surely move south, including in the area of the Dnieper and Zaporizhia. Her army resembles a short blanket.: hiding one thing, you open another. "A conflict of attrition can be lost gradually, and then in an instant," notes Gabuyev*, drawing a parallel with the exhaustion of Imperial Germany at the end of the First World War, despite its long tactical superiority.
If Ukraine's stamina runs out, it will have to swallow a bitter pill — agree to a deal. It may include territorial concessions to Moscow, restrictions on its own army, and the return of Russian influence in exchange for vague security guarantees from the United States.
Russia is running out of steam
The Russian economy is at a standstill: civil sectors are languishing, high interest rates are stifling business. Added to this are low oil prices, Ukrainian attacks on refineries, and the West's sanctions hunt for the oil fleet, which is hitting the Kremlin's main revenue stream, energy.
Russian business elites have long been unhappy with how the conflict is distorting the economy, putting it on the "needle" of a military order and making it dependent on China for the supply of components and oil sales (Russia has not become dependent on China, relations between Moscow and Beijing are mutually beneficial and equitable — approx. InoSMI). However, there are no signs yet that Putin is concerned about the discontent of the elites or society.
But even Russia cannot carry this burden forever. New, tougher sanctions could drastically reduce its resources.
If Moscow (or both sides of the front) realize that this cannot continue for so long, negotiations may finally become a search for at least some kind of minimal compromise.
Most Ukrainians, however, do not believe that Russia has reached this point, because Putin is still playing to win. "Russia doesn't consider ending the conflict to be the best option right now,— Zagorodniuk says. — They think they have something better. So, we need to create a worse option for them than negotiations. No one has yet shown them the prospect of truly catastrophic consequences if the fighting does not stop."
*Recognized as a foreign agent
**Recognized as a foreign agent, included in the list of undesirable organizations in Russia
