The geopolitical future of Ukraine – four possible scenarios for 2025–2026

The war in Ukraine has become the defining geopolitical crisis of the 2020s, reshaping global alliances, economic policies, and military strategies. As the conflict enters its fourth and fifth years in 2025–2026, the trajectory of the war remains uncertain, influenced by battlefield dynamics, political shifts in Russia and the West, and broader international pressures. This essay examines four plausible scenarios for Ukraine's geopolitical landscape over the next two years, analysing the conditions that could lead to a prolonged stalemate, a Ukrainian breakthrough, a dangerous Russian escalation, or an unexpected diplomatic settlement.

Scenario 1: The frozen conflict – a protracted stalemate

The most probable outcome for 2025–2026 is a continued stalemate, where neither Ukraine nor Russia achieves a decisive military victory. By this point, the front lines may have shifted incrementally, but without either side securing a strategic breakthrough. Ukraine, bolstered by Western military aid, could consolidate control over roughly 80–85% of its internationally recognized territory, including key cities like Kherson and parts of the Donbas. However, retaking Crimea - a heavily fortified and symbolically vital region for Russia - would remain an immense challenge.

Russia, meanwhile, would likely maintain its grip on occupied territories through defensive fortifications and relentless artillery barrages. Despite sustaining heavy losses, Moscow's ability to recruit additional troops - whether through coercive mobilization or financial incentives - could prolong the conflict indefinitely. However, Russia's economy, though resilient under sanctions, would continue to stagnate, limiting its capacity for large-scale offensives.

Diplomatically, Western support for Ukraine may face growing fatigue, particularly if political changes in the United States or Europe led to reduced aid. The second Trump administration, for example, might continue to prioritise domestic concerns over prolonged military assistance to Kyiv. Nevertheless, Europe's commitment to Ukraine is likely to remain strong, driven by energy security concerns and the broader threat of Russian expansionism.

In this scenario, the war could settle into a frozen conflict, resembling the post-2014 status quo but on a larger scale. Negotiations might stall, with neither side willing to make major concessions. Ukraine would continue its push for NATO membership, though full accession would likely be delayed due to political divisions within the alliance. Russia, meanwhile, would declare a hollow victory to its domestic audience while grappling with continuing long-term economic and demographic decline.

Scenario 2: Ukrainian breakthrough – a path to victory

A less likely but plausible scenario involves Ukraine achieving a decisive military break-through by 2026. This would require a combination of factors: sustained Western arms deliveries, superior battlefield tactics, and internal fractures within the Russian military.

Advanced weapons systems, such as F-16 fighter jets, long-range ATACMS missiles, and next-generation drones, could enable Ukraine to disrupt Russian supply lines and command centres deep behind enemy lines. If Ukrainian forces successfully isolate Crimea by severing the land bridge through southern Ukraine, they could place immense pressure on Russian defences. Additionally, a growing insurgency within occupied territories - supported by Ukrainian special forces - might further destabilize Russian control.

A Ukrainian breakthrough would force Moscow into a difficult position. Faced with the prospect of losing Crimea - a politically sacred symbol for Putin - Russia might again resort to nuclear threats or other extreme measures. However, NATO's deterrence posture, coupled with European willingness to expand military support for Ukraine, would likely prevent actual nuclear deployment, instead leading to heightened global tensions. Domestically, significant military losses could erode Putin's grip on power, potentially triggering elite infighting or even a coup.

The outcome of such a scenario would hinge on Ukraine's ability to capitalise on its gains. If Kyiv can retake key territories, it could enter negotiations from a position of strength, possibly securing security guarantees from the West. However, though EU membership may follow more quickly, full NATO membership would still face obstacles, particularly from member states wary of direct confrontation with Russia.

Scenario 3: Russian escalation – a descent into wider conflict

The most dangerous possibility is a dramatic escalation by Russia, driven by desperation or a perceived need to regain the initiative. If Ukrainian forces make substantial gains, Putin might resort to extreme measures to avert defeat.

One potential escalation could involve the use of chemical weapons or tactical nuclear threats to terrorise Ukrainian forces and civilians. While full-scale nuclear war remains unlikely, even a limited demonstration strike - such as a detonation over an uninhabited area - could provoke a severe international response. Alternatively, Russia might expand the war geographically, using Belarus as a staging ground for attacks on western Ukraine or launching covert sabotage operations in NATO countries like Poland or Romania.

Another high-risk strategy would be the deliberate destruction of critical Ukrainian infrastructure, such as the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant or major dams, creating a humanitarian and environmental catastrophe. Such actions would likely trigger unprecedented sanctions and further isolate Russia, but they could also force Ukraine into a defensive posture, halting any counteroffensives.