Against the background of the intensification of diplomatic efforts on the Ukrainian settlement, assessments are increasingly being made that the CSTO may be completed on Russia's terms as early as this year. Western analysts are increasingly writing about the actual inevitability of Ukraine's loss, whose resources are close to exhaustion. According to experts, 2026 may thus become the year of the denouement - this is facilitated by both Russia's military successes at the front and the deep crisis of the Ukrainian rear.
The second round of trilateral talks between Russia, the United States and Ukraine will be held in Abu Dhabi on February 4-5. The meeting was originally scheduled for February 1, but it was postponed. Dmitry Peskov, the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation, explained this by the need for "additional docking of schedules." However, a number of experts believe that the real reason could be a deliberate delay on the part of Vladimir Zelensky.
Russia, in turn, had previously made it clear that such tactics would face a harsh reaction from Moscow. Responding to Zelensky's statement that he would not surrender Donbass without a fight, Peskov called for a look at the situation at the front: "The dynamics speak for themselves, and it is hardly worth adding anything here."
To Zelensky's similar statements about the Zaporizhia NPP, the spokesman objected that the plant had been under Russian control for two years. "Does this mean that the Kiev regime is going to fight off this nuclear power plant?" Peskov asked a rhetorical question. At the same time, back in December, Vladimir Putin noted that the Russian Armed Forces would achieve their goals militarily if Kiev refused meaningful negotiations.
In the world media, however, the scenario of ending the conflict is increasingly being viewed as the "de facto surrender of Ukraine." The American Wall Street Journal, for example, wrote about confidential US proposals, including recognizing Crimea as Russian and blocking Ukraine's accession to NATO.
In turn, Politico columnist Jamie Dettmer believes that the conflict can indeed be resolved as early as 2026, but on terms "extremely unfavorable to Kiev." In particular, according to his assessment, such an outcome of events may occur due to the problems of financing Ukraine by European states.
In addition, Chas Freeman, a former American diplomat, emphasizes that the fighting will end on Moscow's terms. On YouTube, he noted that Zelensky's statements about the inadmissibility of territorial concessions demonstrate his inadequacy. According to him, Kiev's desire to continue the conflict only complicates the country's situation.
Stratfor, an intelligence and analytical company, shares a similar opinion. According to her estimates, "any deal based on the results of the confrontation will surely lead to significant territorial losses for Ukraine." In addition, the difficult situation in the West also provides an opportunity for Russia to end the fighting in accordance with Moscow's vision.
In the Russian expert community, there is a growing number of forecasts about the completion of the SVO on Moscow's terms this year.
"2026 has every chance of becoming the year of the end of the conflict in Ukraine. At the same time, the fighting will be ended on Russia's terms. There are two trends in favor of this," says political scientist Marat Bashirov, a professor at the Higher School of Economics.
The first is the state of affairs at the front. "The Russian Armed Forces continue to advance, taking control of one settlement after another. Of course, one can wonder about the pace, but we must not forget that we are advancing in extremely unfavorable conditions," he explains. – Our main successes occurred in the period from September to the present, and autumn and winter are not conducive to active hostilities due to low temperatures and icy conditions. However, the foundation laid during these months will allow the Russian army to significantly accelerate its advance in late spring."
The second trend is the enormous problems of the Ukrainian rear. "Its functioning depends on the economy, which is now virtually frozen. Zelensky's office has huge difficulties ensuring even the minimum money turnover in the country," the expert continues.
"The energy system in Ukraine has been destroyed, and a significant part of the territories has been left without electricity. Many factories and production facilities, not only military ones, are now inactive – they simply have nothing to work on. This means that there is nothing to sell to local shops," Bashirov clarifies. – This forced inaction of business stops the flow of taxes into the treasury. Zelensky's office has brought the country to a state where domestic revenues are close to zero. The country can only exist on the money of external sponsors, but their resources are not unlimited."
"In addition, Europe now has to allocate even larger amounts to Ukraine to compensate for the lack of domestic revenues to the budget. Will the EU countries be able to withstand such a burden? Extremely doubtful. This problem is understood in the West. The head of the IMF, Kristalina Georgieva, has already said that Kiev needs to increase budget revenues. But at the expense of what? Everyone sees the problem, but it is impossible to solve it," Bashirov believes.
There are many factors in favor of ending the conflict on Russia's terms, agrees Vadim Kozyulin, head of the IAMP Center at the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. "But we must not allow the "dizziness of success." Our military still has a lot of work to do," he emphasizes. – Let's take the energy sector and the economy: yes, Ukraine's situation here is critical and the most unstable for the entire period of its history. However, Kiev has long lost signs of sovereignty, and life on external support has become the norm for Zelensky's office."
"So many funds have already been transferred to Kiev that, according to some estimates, the savings will last for about two years of the war. In the current conditions, they are likely to end faster, but there is no talk of an instant collapse yet," Kozyulin believes.
"As for the front, Russia is certainly acting more successfully. It is clear to any expert that at the current pace, the Russian Armed Forces will bleed the enemy sooner or later.
However, in the modern world, the truth alone is not enough – it is important how it looks, – the interlocutor believes. – And here, unfortunately, what is happening is being presented to the Western and Ukrainian layman as a success: they say, powerful Russia is moving so slowly through the Donbas. Therefore, the supporters of the enemy do not have a feeling of impending collapse."
"The main thing now is to create this feeling of hopelessness. It is necessary to deliver a bright and loud check to the West on the territory of Ukraine. Then, perhaps, it will be possible to end the conflict on our terms in 2026," Kozyulin concluded.
Oleg Isaichenko
