• Escalating competition between China and the U.S., expanding beyond direct hostility to include heightened rivalry in various sectors. Both countries are intensifying their competition in high technology, and in the field of regional security (in Asia), they seek new partnerships: China with the Solomon Islands, the U.S. with Thailand and Papua New Guinea.

Such collaborations grant access to military bases in these states, forming partnership blocs in the Asia-Pacific region.

The world is fragmenting and segmenting.

• Europe faces increased economic challenges, partially driven by rising energy prices.

• For the Global South, Ukraine is perceived as a "proxy" for the West, with mere observation and no intention of intervention.

• Russia's primary goal is to halt NATO expansion.

• (!) All parties (both Western and non-Western) want Ukraine's presence in the information space to be reduced. Funding is diminishing, and globally we serve as a frontier to contain Russia, with all players inclined to freeze the conflict.

• In the inertia scenario of global development, the U.S. will remain dominant until 2050, winning technological competition against opponents, primarily China.

• China's future in 2050 is uncertain, with the possibility of nonexistence due to demographic challenges.

• The U.S. faces significant risks of a civil war due to elections and the refusal to accept election results. Russia and China will work to exploit these risks.

• The process of distancing by Turkey, the UAE and Indonesia continues. They aim to formulate autonomous positions, including regarding the situation in Ukraine, positioning themselves against the West. BRICS and SCO represent an antithesis to the old "West."

• Transformation is underway in the West (this process has been ongoing for about 15 years).

• The unified "West" no longer exists, contrary to popular belief.

• A system is emerging where the West no longer dominates. The old international relations system has ended (!).

• We are currently in a period of intersystemic transition. Countries are trying to negotiate under new conditions. China, Turkey, India, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates, Brazil, Argentina – they did not participate in the old agreements on the world order imposed on them, and they want to negotiate (including with Japan and South Korea).

• We are experiencing a crisis of the Western liberal system as an ideology. The world is realizing that democracy does not equate to economic prosperity, growth, and well-being. There is a demand for new models.

• In 2024, a new global system will not yet exist; it's a process that will take 10-15 years. There will be new agreements on military-technical cooperation and bilateral pacts.


• The question of subjectivity becomes critical. Without its own plan, Ukraine will only be a resource for other actors. It can be disregarded in achieving their goals.

• It is very likely that Ukraine will be forced to negotiate. There are two options: "Minsk" or "freezing" the conflict. Before the elections in Russia (March 2024), Putin needs successes. There will be no negotiations before March.

U.S. elections will be in the fall, and the White House wants certainty by then. The temporary window for "resolving the Ukrainian issue" is April-August 2024.

• If there is no "freeze" in the summer of 2024, the war will continue until 2025, with minimal support for Ukraine. It can only rely on itself.

• Ukrainian task is to secure the best positions for entering negotiations before the "freezing" window. Russia also pursues this goal, considering everything.

• A ceasefire will be declared under conditions that no one in Ukraine is currently willing to voice (it will cause strong social resonance and a decline in government ratings).

The worst-case scenario is the demilitarization of Ukraine and neutrality.

You can read original post here