“Last week was the worst week for Russian President Vladimir Putin since he invaded Ukraine seven months ago, in a decision that lacked wisdom, justice, compassion, and had no plan B,” according to an article in the New York Times.

At the beginning of his article, veteran journalist Thomas Friedman reviewed what he considered the setbacks that Russia suffered last week at the military, diplomatic and even domestic levels.

The writer summarized what the Russians suffered by saying that Ukraine and its allies had just forced the Russian invaders to a chaotic withdrawal from a large part of the territory, and that the leaders of China and India had expressed to their ally Putin their discontent with his war and the resulting inflation in food and energy that harmed the population of their countries of 2.7 billion people, In addition, a Russian pop star declared to her 3.4 million followers on Instagram that the war was "turning our country into a pariah state and causing the lives of our citizens to deteriorate."

Rather, resentment reached Russia’s European allies, according to Friedman, who highlights that he discovered during many of his conversations with these allies that they are also concerned, and despite these developments, the writer says that the question that still arises since the beginning of the war is: How does this war end in a balanced way? and fixed?


3 tracks

Here, Friedman says that he is still ignorant of the definitive answer to this, but he notes that during his search for that answer, he discovered that there are “3 possible outcomes, some completely new, some familiar, but all of them come with complex and unexpected side effects”:

Or not

For Ukraine to win completely, which could prompt Putin - according to Friedman - to take a crazy act, when he sees himself directly facing humiliation and defeat.

But Friedman highlighted that no one expects the Ukrainian army to be able to follow up on the significant military gains it has made over the past two weeks by expelling the remaining forces from the places where they are entrenched. with it.

secondly

To cut a "dirty deal" with Putin that secures a ceasefire and halts destruction, but risks dividing Western allies and angering many Ukrainians.

The writer has made it clear here that he cannot imagine that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky would accept a ceasefire or something close to it, as his forces currently enjoy a great deal of momentum, and he has committed to reclaiming every inch of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea.


Third

To strike a “less dirty bargain” in which things go back to before Putin invaded Ukraine last February, and Friedman believes that Kyiv may be willing to live with that, and perhaps even the Russian people as well, but Friedman believes that such a deal may not They are possible unless Putin is overthrown first, as he cannot bear to face the indisputable and consequential truth that his war was "absurd" in every sense of the word.

After reviewing those possible outcomes, Friedman explained that the contrast between the three possibilities is deep, pointing out that whatever the outcome, most of us will continue to be affected by this war, saying: "You may not be interested in the Ukraine war, but the Ukraine war will take care of you, energy and food prices, and most importantly. It's your humanity."

Friedman concluded his article by saying that this war can end in different ways, some better than others and some worse, but none of them will be easy, "This is even without the fourth outcome, anything that no one can predict," according to the writer.