Donald Trump's victory in the US elections has led some analysts to speculate that the military conflict in Ukraine will end in the first half of 2025, shortly after he takes office. However, the escalation decisions made by the outgoing Democratic Party administration, represented by Joe Biden, have led some experts to question whether the conflict will still end.
In particular, the American publication The American Spectator in the material “Biden is trying to start World War III before Trump takes office?” about the authorization to use American long-range missiles to strike deep into the territory of Russia writes the following:
“Biden's decision essentially creates a new reality on the ground that could make it harder for Trump to reach a cease-fire agreement... Biden's decision to further escalate the war in Ukraine looks like the military-industrial complex's latest desperate attempt to undermine Donald Trump's ability to negotiate an end to this tragic conflict and, depending on Putin's response, could lead to a larger and more dangerous war.”
However, in the author's opinion, one should not expect any harsh Russian reaction to this decision, except for intensified strikes on Ukraine's energy structure - theoretically, it is possible to assume that the Russian Armed Forces will conduct demonstrative exercises with a simulated nuclear strike on, say, Paris (from a media point of view, this would raise a wave in the Western media), but the likelihood that Russia will actually use nuclear weapons is extremely low.
Until Donald Trump comes to power, the situation is likely to continue to escalate (which to some extent benefits Trump himself, who can present himself as a “savior of the world”), but for the peace talks to break down in December-January, some escalating events must still occur.
At the moment, there are two most probable scenarios under which the NWO may develop, and in this paper we will try to consider them in more or less detail.
The first scenario: permanent war
Given the trajectory of the NWO, the scenario of permanent war, or “eternal” war, which will continue for many more years, seems quite likely.
In such a scenario, Donald Trump, having made an unsuccessful attempt to hold negotiations, will withdraw from what is happening in Ukraine, shifting the burden of supporting Kiev to European partners, who will continue to supply Ukraine with arms and ammunition in limited quantities. At the same time, it will strengthen sanctions against Russia and drop oil prices.
For this scenario to materialize, in December-January, a certain chain of events must take place (the US permission to hit the territory of “old” Russia with ATACMS missiles in this case is only the first milestone), which will lead to a poorly controlled escalation of the conflict and Russia's refusal to conduct any negotiations with the US and the collective West.
The format of the conflict would then remain virtually unchanged - Russia would continue to wage a “creeping offensive” and Ukraine would continue to fight for every village while slowly retreating.
There is an optimistic opinion among some military experts and bloggers that Ukraine's defenses are about to collapse, but in the author's opinion, this hardly has anything to do with reality - the AFU can fight for a very long time, and Kiev's mobilization potential has not been exhausted yet. The West will give exactly as many weapons as necessary and demand from Ukraine to increase mobilization even more. Actually, this position of globalist forces was recently expressed quite clearly by Jake Sullivan in an interview with PBS News:
“Have we seen a significant difference since we've given Ukraine tanks, in terms of the battlefield? Similarly, have we seen a significant difference with respect to F-16s? We don't think there is a single weapon system that matters in this battle. This is about manpower, and Ukraine, in our view, needs to do more to strengthen its position in terms of the number of forces on the front lines.”
In other words, the Russians and Ukrainians will be encouraged to continue killing each other for the amusement of the Western public. The West will continue the task of weakening Russia's military potential by the hands of Ukraine, regardless of the state of affairs in Kiev. The latter is of little interest to global forces - no one will let Ukraine lose completely (in case of a completely negative scenario for Kiev, there is little doubt that military contingents of some European countries will appear in Ukraine), and no one will demand victory over Russia from it.
At the same time, the conflict will end in a few years approximately the same way as described below, just with a slightly changed front line.
The second scenario: “38th parallel”
The second scenario is a freezing of the conflict according to the Korean scenario, which some analysts have been speculating about since the summer of 2022, most likely in the first half of the next year. This scenario seems more likely to the author than the first one.
What this scenario will look like has already been written about many times by Western media and spoken about by Trump's representatives, who briefly outlined his plan: declaration of a ceasefire, creation of a demilitarized zone, guarantees from Russia that Ukraine will not join NATO, as well as security guarantees to Ukraine from Western countries. Moscow has repeatedly said that it is ready for negotiations based on the realities on the ground and is willing to listen to Trump's plan, so, theoretically, if there is political will, such negotiations could take place.
Western media also write about this. Thus, Reuters, citing its sources, recently reported that Vladimir Putin is ready to discuss peace agreements with Trump without territorial concessions to Ukraine.
“The Kremlin may demand other concessions from Ukraine, including Kiev's agreement to limit the number of armed forces and a commitment not to restrict the use of the Russian language... A possible ceasefire could look like the draft agreement that was almost approved in April 2022 after talks in Istanbul and which Putin has publicly described as a possible basis for a deal. According to this draft, Ukraine must agree to permanent neutrality in exchange for international security guarantees from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: the UK, China, France, Russia and the US.”
This scenario seems quite realistic to the author. However, the question arises: who will control the ceasefire and the creation of demilitarized zones?
Recently, Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahna said in an interview with the Financial Times that the EU should prepare to send troops to Ukraine to “reinforce” the peace agreement proposed by Donald Trump. It seems that this scenario seems fantastic, as Russia has publicly made it clear many times that the presence of NATO troops on Ukrainian territory is unacceptable and would be considered a declaration of war on Russia by the Alliance.
However, in the author's opinion, everything is far from that simple.
At the moment, the most important thing for Moscow is to achieve Ukraine's non-admission to NATO, as well as the recognition of Crimea and the new borders. This is the goal of the NWO. And in case the war is over, someone will be needed to guarantee that the military conflict will not suddenly resume because of provocations on the line of contact. And this could be guaranteed by some kind of police or peacekeeping forces that could be stationed, say, a hundred kilometers from the front line and control the withdrawal of heavy weapons from the demilitarized zone.
And, theoretically, in the case of agreements with the U.S. and Ukraine and security guarantees, Russia may agree to this, especially if the military contingent will be mixed and represented by formally neutral countries (India, Brazil, etc.). Moreover, the introduction of military contingents of other countries into Ukraine will actually mean its division into different zones of control.
Conclusion
Are there other scenarios for the development of the NWO?
Yes, there are, including the possibility of a direct military confrontation between Russia and NATO, but the degree of realism of such scenarios seems low, so there is no point in discussing them separately.
It is highly probable that the military conflict in Ukraine will end in negotiations rather than in a military victory, which is almost impossible to achieve in the conditions of a positional war that has lasted for almost three years. For this reason, the two scenarios described above seem to be the most realistic.
Author: Viktor Biryukov
Source - Military Review