By John Q. Hosedrinker 
President Zelensky stated that Russia would need another four years to fully occupy the Donbas region, which it partially invaded in 2014. Currently, after a full-scale war, Russia controls approximately two-thirds of the Donetsk Oblast. Zelensky views Russia’s insistence on Ukraine withdrawing from Donbas as a potential condition for declaring victory. Furthermore, he denied reports that he didn’t reject a land swap with Russia, asserting his willingness to discuss territorial issues directly with Putin.
Read the original article here
Russia’s projected timeline to fully occupy Donbas, as stated by Zelensky, places the estimate at around four years. This projection offers a sobering glimpse into the protracted nature of the conflict, a conflict that has already raged for a significant amount of time. It’s a statement that underscores the immense challenges Russia faces in achieving its military objectives within the Ukrainian territory, particularly in a region where fierce resistance is likely to persist.
The analysis that led to this four-year estimate considers the pace of Russia’s advances, the attrition rates, and the overall scale of the Donbas region. Despite the relentless fighting and the significant resources deployed, Russia’s territorial gains since the start of the large-scale invasion have been relatively modest, adding to the complexity of achieving complete control. To put it in perspective, a recent report indicated that Russia has only managed to gain less than one percent of Ukrainian territory since 2022.
This, however, is not how wars of attrition work. The Allied Powers were prepared for a long drawn out battle in WWI, but a collapse occurred. Much like the collapse in 1918, a significant breakthrough in the defensive lines could lead to a rapid change in the front lines, potentially accelerating the conflict’s conclusion.
There is no question that Russia banks on its advantage in manpower, betting that it can endure the conflict longer than Ukraine can. Their strategy seems to be based on outlasting Ukrainian resistance, anticipating a point where their numerical superiority will overwhelm Ukraine’s technological and strategic advantages. It’s a high-stakes gamble, resting on the belief that sheer numbers can ultimately prevail.
Considering the varying scenarios in play, the situation could evolve in numerous ways. Some analysts suggest a possible collapse of the Russian war machine by mid-2026, while others anticipate Ukraine’s struggle to defend its eastern territories by 2027. The West’s role in tilting the balance significantly depends on its resolve and the degree to which it provides Ukraine with support.
The prolonged conflict has also highlighted the immense cost of war. It’s not just about territory or military gains; it’s about the human toll. Estimates suggest a significant number of casualties on both sides, with the potential for millions more deaths if the war continues for the projected four years. The human cost is simply devastating.
A key element in this conflict is the crucial support Ukraine receives from its allies, primarily the NATO countries. This steady stream of weapons, financial aid, and training is crucial for Ukraine’s ability to resist the Russian invasion. Simultaneously, tough sanctions on Russia are necessary to curtail its ability to wage war.
Furthermore, the discussion of this conflict brings to light the economic realities and challenges faced by both nations. Russia’s economy faces significant strain, while Ukraine’s economy is in dire straits. The burden of rebuilding and recovering from the war will be a long-term challenge for both sides.
The assessment, while providing a framework for understanding the timeline of the conflict, is based on various assumptions and estimations. History tells us that wars can be unpredictable, and the front lines can shift rapidly. One side collapses exponentially. It is clear that the war’s trajectory is subject to numerous factors, making any prediction inherently uncertain.
There are also practical considerations that should be acknowledged. While Ukraine is constantly receiving assistance and weapons, the source and availability of such aid are subject to change. While the US may have stopped offering free support, European countries are attempting to help as much as possible.
There’s also the reality of military capability on the ground. Russia’s military, while possessing a manpower advantage, faces several significant challenges. Issues such as inadequate training, logistical problems, and the obsolescence of equipment limit Russia’s ability to effectively engage in modern warfare. A lack of armored vehicles is also adding to the issues for the Russian forces.
Finally, the human element of the conflict is crucial. The will of the Ukrainian people to resist, the leadership of its military, and the impact of the war on the morale of the soldiers on both sides, will determine the outcome. The presence of volunteers and the willingness of each side to fight will ultimately determine the future.