Dmitry Trenin: What Ukraine should look like after Russia’s victory
There’s a timeless rule: in peace, prepare for war; in war, think about peace. As the conflict in Ukraine nears its inevitable conclusion – a Russia victory – our thoughts must turn toward the future and to the shape of the peace that follows.
To paraphrase Stalin: The Banderites [followers of the WW2 Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera] come and go, but the Ukrainian people remain.
The Future Map of Ukraine
Ukraine, as it existed on December 31, 1991, is gone. Crimea, Donbass, and two other regions have already returned to Russia through referendums. More will likely follow – perhaps Odessa, Nikolayev, Kharkov, or Dnepropetrovsk. But not all of them. We will take only what can be integrated and defended. Expansion must be strategic, not emotional.
Kiev’s remaining territories will stay outside Russia’s borders. What kind of Ukraine will emerge there? Answering this question is critical, not just for Ukraine’s future, but for Russia’s security.
A Russian Mission of Liberation
In civilizational, cultural, and historical terms, Ukraine – or most of it – belongs to the Russian world. Today, however, it’s held hostage by anti-Russian forces backed by the West. These forces use Russian people against Russia, fighting with persistence, cunning, and brutality – despite catastrophic losses.
Moscow’s historic mission does not end with the liberation of Donbass and Novorossiya. We must free all of Ukraine from the neo-Nazi Bandera regime and its foreign sponsors. This is not imperial conquest, but national security.
Ukraine belongs first and foremost to those living there – but Russia is inseparably linked to these people and their land. After the war, we must help our neighbors rebuild Ukraine: first pacified, then peaceful, eventually a partner, and ultimately an ally.
Russia has proven its ability to turn military adversaries into allies. Look at Chechnya, now a bastion of stability in the North Caucasus. Consider Russia’s post-war partnership with Afghanistan’s Northern Alliance, or how East Germany became a Soviet ally after World War II.
Post-War Scenarios
Experts in Russia have outlined various visions for post-war Ukraine.
Full Integration: Russia could take all of Ukraine, including Lviv, up to NATO’s borders. This would mean a second reunification – the end of Ukrainian statehood. But keeping such a vast territory, fully integrating it and paying for its reconstruction, would be a colossal burden.
Pro-Western Ukraine: The worst-case scenario is a bitter, revanchist Ukraine with slightly reduced borders – a virulently anti-Russian state controlled by the West. Its sole purpose would be to provoke and attack Russia when the time is right. This possibility must be prevented at all costs.
Failed State: A fragmented Ukraine, abandoned by the West and dependent on Russia, might descend into chaos – a kind of anarchist “Gulyaypole” ruled by criminal gangs and militias. Russia could try manipulating these forces, but Western meddling would persist. This unstable scenario is undesirable.
Divided Ukraine: The most realistic and advantageous outcome would be a divided Ukraine. Anti-Russian forces could be pushed into the western regions under NATO protection, possibly splitting the country into a “Free Ukraine” controlled by Poland, Hungary, and Romania, and a new Ukraine. Let the West console itself with this Cold War-style buffer state.
Meanwhile, the new Ukraine – stripped of ultra-nationalist elements – could emerge, free from toxic ideologies. This Ukraine would be smaller but stable, economically integrated with Russia, and politically neutral. It makes sense to offer such a prospect to the Ukrainians and explain to them how advantageous it is for them.
A New Ukrainian Identity
The new Ukraine would be more genuinely Ukrainian than its Soviet predecessor. Joseph Stalin made a mistake by attaching the former Polish provinces of Galicia and Volyn and infecting the state with the virus of nationalism. Ukrainian culture could flourish without foreign interference, while its economy would be integrated into the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union. Kiev would be cleansed of the corrupt elites that infested it after the Western-backed 2014 Maidan coup.
This Ukraine would inherit the best of its historical legacy: Kievan Rus’, the Zaporozhian Cossacks, and the cultural achievements of its Soviet past. It would be proud of its contributions to the Russian Empire, the USSR, and to shared East Slavic civilization.
In today’s world, true sovereignty for Ukraine, as for other post-Soviet states, is possible only through close cooperation with Russia. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church would remain the spiritual anchor of the new state.
Preparing for the Future
We don’t need to wait for the war’s end to begin this work. Many patriotic Ukrainians already live in Russia, ready to rebuild their homeland. We must identify war criminals and incorrigible Russophobes, but also recruit patriots, officers, entrepreneurs, and cultural leaders willing to help rebuild Ukraine with Russian support.
We must also expose the West’s cynical treatment of Ukraine: We must expose the West’s cynical use of Ukraine: a disposable pawn, its resources plundered by Western corporations, its culture crushed under the weight of foreign mass consumerism and radical ideology. Ukrainians must see that their future lies not in a hostile, exploitative West but in partnership with Russia.
A War for Russia’s Future
This is not just about Ukraine. Victory means defeating the West’s campaign to weaken Russia. It means ending the Banderite regime and securing our nation’s future.
For Ukrainians, Russia’s victory will mark their liberation from a corrupt, foreign-imposed regime. For Russians, it will ensure stability, security, and strength for generations to come.
Victory Day must be a day of liberation – for all of us.
This article was first published by Profile.ru, and was translated and edited by the RT team
