Are Russia and Ukraine ready to accept 'frozen conflict' after years of fighting?

Ukraine may be forced to lose territory as price of Trump-driven ceasefire

Ukrainian recruits undergoing training in the Zaporizhzhia region. EPA

After heavy casualties, a huge loss of equipment and major damage to infrastructure, are Russia and Ukraine prepared to move towards an end to the war?

The National has learnt that senior military officials from Ukraine would accept a “frozen-in-place” conflict in return for a halt to the fighting. Russian analysts have argued that Moscow would be content to bring an end to the advances it has made at great cost, to allow its battered forces to rebuild.

Concessions could need to be made by both sides, with an opening round of peace talks to follow Friday’s Alaska summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, if the meeting takes place without a hiccup.

Former British military intelligence officer Lynette Nusbacher told The National that Russia could be grateful for "rest and recuperation", before fighting flares again in years to come. Meanwhile, intelligence expert Frank Ledwidge has detected indications from Ukraine that it realises the game is up and it needs to protect what is left of the country, before support from countries such as the US ebbs away.

Ukrainian soldiers fire at Russian positions in Ukraine. Getty Images

Land grabbed

In Ukraine, it is against the constitution to give up sovereign territory, but the reality is that Russia has seized 115,000 square kilometres, about one fifth of the country, since 2014.

Kyiv has tried to reclaim territory. It was highly successful in retaking land in the summer following Russia’s invasion in February 2022. Armed with advanced western hardware, Ukraine hoped to break through the front line the following year, but that push failed.

Since then, Russia has undertaken an immense attritional offensive, at times losing up to 1,570 people a day, according to UK Defence Ministry estimates, while moving the front lines forward incrementally.

Drone army

Its war machine has also kicked in, with industry able to develop a major drone army that could generate 40,000 of the Geran-2 attack models this year.

Waves of drones are causing civilian deaths and infrastructure damage, with a record 6,200 Geran-2 drones, which are based on the Iranian Shahed 136, fired into Ukraine in July. Analysts say Russia has learnt “the hard way” that drones are the primary weapon of modern warfare and in recent months that has seen success.

Although the casualty rate by modern standards is horrific – the UK Ministry of Defence said the average daily toll was 1,070 last month – it is declining gradually, despite Russia taking more territory.

Its military has also adapted by using fewer armoured vehicles, which are easy prey for drones, and instead moving troops to the front lines using motorbikes.

Moscow’s own drone use has expanded to the point that Ukraine’s ground lines of communication, which are used to move troops, ammunition, food and fuel forward, are under intense pressure up to 20km from the front line.

Changing conditions

Russian generals are also aware they have Ukraine’s military under enough pressure to continue its creeping summer offensive until the end of September, when the heavy rain of the so-called autumn rasputitsa makes roads impassable.

Russia is likely to recommend a ceasefire, with the front lines to be frozen in place, after it seizes as much territory as possible Ms Nusbacher said. “Russia would consider it a good three years’ effort if at this point they could step back from the fight for a few years, holding the relevant five chunks of Ukraine,” she added.

“Freezing the conflict for a period of time is optimally a moment when the Russians hold as much of Ukraine as possible, then they can rearm and reconstitute their forces.”

Russia will use the rest well, she said. It would take months or a few years – as it did after the 2014 annexation of Crimea and Donbas – to prepare for its next invasion.

A damaged street in Bucha, Ukraine. The war has caused widespread damage. Getty Images

Content to cede

To prevent that, much depends on what security guarantees Nato, and especially the US, can give Ukraine and whether a “coalition of the willing” defensive western force is viable to deter another attack.

That will also have a major bearing on whether Ukraine concedes to accept the de facto position – which Mr Trump supports – that Ukraine needs to give up one fifth of its country in return for peace.

But Mr Ledwidge said that senior military officials in Ukraine told him during his visit to the country this week that accepting a frozen conflict was realistic.

“For the first time in three years I've been coming here, they said they understand that realistically Nato membership may not be practicable and they would be prepared to lose land, in a de facto sense rather than legal one, as they understand the reality of situation,” he told The National from Kyiv. “That's what they're prepared to countenance.”

Mr Ledwidge was surprised by the change in position, but said the officials accepted “we'll probably end up with frozen conflict for a long time to come”.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer welcomes Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to Downing Street. PA

Holding on

With diminished military aid, Russian advances and the menace of a massive drone barrage, Ukraine is holding on, but only just. If Mr Trump decides Kyiv must be forced to accept territorial concessions, he could cut off US intelligence assistance. When that happened earlier this year, Ukraine lost a large chunk of territory and had little warning of incoming air raids.

The problem for Moscow is that, over three years of war, Russia has been “unable to convert its territorial gains into a Ukrainian capitulation” and that was unlikely to change in the Alaska talks, Ms Nusbacher said.

There is a suggestion that a deal could be reached in which Russia holds security and economic control over seized territory, in a similar way to how Israel occupies the West Bank. Mr Putin could be lured towards such a prospect with offers of mineral exploitation in seized territory. There is also a danger that rejection of an agreement by Mr Zelenskyy “might remove any further vestiges of US support", Ms Nusbacher said.

That would greatly weaken Ukraine’s position and “would be decisive in causing it a rapid defeat by Russia”, said Brig Ben Barry, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank. He added that he did not see “a sense of urgency that we really need to ramp up our support” from the West.

Russian President Vladimir Putin. Reuters

Diplomatic moves

But Mr Zelenskyy will be hopeful a round of diplomacy this week will help shore up his position, stating that the US was “ready to support us”, after a remote video conference with the American and European leaders.

A ceasefire is still possible, with Mr Trump announcing there would be “very severe consequences” if Mr Putin did not accept a truce. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who welcomed Mr Zelenskyy to Downing Street in a show of support on Thursday, also stated there was a “viable chance as long as Putin takes action to prove he is serious about peace”.

The Ukraine military wants to be able to hold out until the rasputitsa then “see what happens”, with the potential that US sanctions could severely damage Russia’s economy and Moscow loses its extraordinary ability to still recruit 30,000 troops a month.

“The Ukrainians are very concerned about the tactical side, but they’re just holding out on their own, just waiting for what comes next,” Mr Ledwidge said.

Ultimately, Ukraine is fighting for its sovereignty and it was “not going to stop fighting if their current leader has stepped out of the picture", senior Kyiv officers have told Ms Nusbacher.

But if Mr Putin was to leave office, that would be "a significant change in Russia's ability to continue to prosecute this war”, she added. That meant that any deal from Alaska “has ultimately got a fairly short sell-by date”.