Plausible Scenarios for the End of the War in Ukraine: International Law Under Pressure

-

Introduction

The war in Ukraine, launched by the Russian Federation in February 2022, represents the most serious challenge to the post–World War II international order in Europe. Beyond its devastating human and economic costs, the conflict is defined by a fundamental breach of international law, particularly the prohibition of aggressive war enshrined in the United Nations Charter.

As the conflict continues with no comprehensive settlement in sight, policymakers, analysts, and international organizations are increasingly focused on how the war might end. This article examines the most plausible scenarios for the conclusion of the war in Ukraine, assessing their legal, political, and security implications, with a particular emphasis on international law.

The Legal Context: A War of Aggression

Any discussion of future scenarios must begin with a legal baseline. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine constitutes a violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. Claims of “self-defense,” “humanitarian intervention,” or “historical entitlement” lack recognition under international law.

Ukraine, by contrast, is exercising its inherent right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. This asymmetry is crucial: peace scenarios that reward aggression risk undermining the entire international legal system.

Scenario 1: Negotiated Settlement with Territorial Compromises

One frequently discussed scenario is a negotiated settlement in which active hostilities end through a ceasefire, followed by a political agreement that freezes or partially legitimizes territorial changes.

Why it is plausible

  • War fatigue among populations and elites.

  • Pressure from global actors concerned about economic instability.

  • Precedents such as the Korean Armistice or post-2014 Donbas arrangements.

Legal implications
From the perspective of international law, this is the most problematic scenario. Any agreement that recognizes territorial acquisitions achieved by force directly contradicts the principle of inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. Even a de facto acceptance—without formal recognition—would weaken legal norms and set a dangerous precedent for future conflicts.

Assessment
Politically possible, legally corrosive. Peace achieved at the cost of legal principles would be fragile and reversible.

Scenario 2: Prolonged “Frozen Conflict”

Another plausible outcome is a long-term frozen conflict, characterized by low-intensity fighting, unresolved territorial disputes, and no comprehensive peace treaty.

Why it is plausible

  • Military stalemate.

  • Inability of either side to impose decisive outcomes.

  • External actors sustaining the status quo through limited support.

Legal implications
International law would continue to recognize Ukraine’s territorial integrity, while occupation would remain illegal. However, prolonged occupation normalizes illegality through inertia. History shows that “temporary” occupations have a habit of lasting decades.

Assessment
Strategically convenient for some actors, legally unresolved, and deeply destabilizing for regional security.

Scenario 3: Ukrainian Military Victory and Restoration of Territorial Integrity

This scenario involves Ukraine regaining control over its internationally recognized territory, followed by a peace settlement based on withdrawal of Russian forces.

Why it is plausible

  • Continued military, financial, and intelligence support from Western states.

  • High costs for Russia in manpower, economy, and political legitimacy.

  • Historical examples where aggressors failed despite initial advantages.

Legal implications
This is the only scenario fully consistent with international law. It reinforces the prohibition of aggression, affirms state sovereignty, and strengthens the credibility of international norms.

Assessment
Legally sound and normatively desirable, but dependent on sustained international commitment and significant human and material costs.

Scenario 4: Regime Change or Strategic Reversal in Russia

A less predictable but often discussed scenario involves major political change within Russia, leading to withdrawal from Ukraine.

Why it is plausible

  • Internal political pressure.

  • Economic sanctions over the long term.

  • Elite fragmentation.

Legal implications
A withdrawal following regime change would still require accountability for war crimes and reparations. International law does not disappear with governments, and responsibility for aggression is state-based, not merely personal.

Assessment
Low predictability, high impact. International law would benefit, but justice mechanisms would remain contentious.

Scenario 5: Escalation Followed by Imposed Settlement

A dangerous scenario involves escalation—potentially regional or involving unconventional weapons—followed by a settlement imposed under extreme pressure.

Why it is plausible

  • Miscalculation.

  • Breakdown of deterrence.

  • Attempts to force negotiations through escalation.

Legal implications
Escalation would compound violations of international humanitarian law and could involve crimes of extreme gravity. Any settlement reached under such conditions would be legally and morally compromised.

Assessment
A scenario best avoided. International law is designed precisely to prevent this outcome—its failure here would be catastrophic.

Accountability and the Role of International Justice

Regardless of how the war ends, violations of international humanitarian law, including war crimes and crimes against humanity, must be addressed. The question of the crime of aggression—currently limited by jurisdictional constraints—remains central.

A sustainable peace requires more than silence of guns; it requires legal accountability. Without it, the message is clear: power prevails over law.

Conclusion

The end of the war in Ukraine will not merely shape Eastern Europe; it will redefine the authority of international law in the 21st century. Scenarios that ignore or dilute legal principles may deliver short-term stability, but at the cost of long-term insecurity.

International law is often criticized as weak, but its real strength depends on whether states are willing to defend it when it matters most. Ukraine is not only fighting for territory—it is fighting for a legal order in which borders are not rewritten by force.

History will be less interested in how quickly the war ended, and far more interested in on what terms.


Comments

Post a Comment

Leave your comment below. Your feedback helps us improve.

Popular posts from this blog

The 2026 Iran–United States–Israel Confrontation: objective analysis of causes, justifications, legal issues, likely endgames and economic consequences

-
Image
  Summary Between late February and early March 2026, coordinated strikes by the United States and Israel against targets inside the Islamic Republic of Iran produced a dramatic escalation: explosions in multiple Iranian cities, substantial Iranian retaliatory missile and drone attacks against Israeli territory and U.S. forces in the region, and significant civilian casualties and infrastructure damage within Iran. The confrontation has immediate regional security implications, measurable economic effects (notably on energy and shipping), and raises contested questions under international law about the legality of the use of force and compliance with the laws of armed conflict. This article summarizes the sequence of events as reported publicly, summarizes the official rationales offered by the belligerents, lays out where international-law violations have been alleged on each side, reviews the initial reactions of the international community, and concludes with plausible scenario...
Read more

The Case for a Unified European Army: Strategic Autonomy, Security, and the Future of EU Power

-
Image
Introduction: From Economic Giant to Strategic Actor For decades, the European Union has been described as an economic superpower and a political dwarf. While the EU has built an impressive single market, a common currency for many of its members, and a complex system of governance, it has consistently struggled to translate its economic weight into strategic and military power. The debate over the creation of a unified European army—also referred to as a common European defense force—sits at the heart of this contradiction. In the context of rising geopolitical instability, renewed great power competition, war on Europe’s borders, cyber threats, terrorism, and uncertainty about long-term transatlantic commitments, the question is no longer whether the European Union can afford a unified army, but whether it can afford not to build one. This analysis explores the opportunity of creating a European army, why it has become strategically necessary, how it could be structured and funct...
Read more

The Potential Reunification of the Republic of Moldova and Romania: History, Opportunities, Risks, and Geopolitical Implications

-
Image
  Introduction The idea of reunifying the Republic of Moldova with Romania has remained one of the most debated political and geopolitical topics in Eastern Europe since the collapse of the Soviet Union. While often treated as a sensitive or controversial issue, reunification is deeply rooted in history, cultural identity, and international law. In recent years, regional instability, Russia’s assertive foreign policy, and Moldova’s gradual alignment with the European Union have revived discussions about whether unification represents a realistic and beneficial long-term solution. This article examines the historical foundations of the Republic of Moldova’s Romanian character, the legal and political feasibility of reunification, the potential advantages and disadvantages of such a process, and how this scenario compares to the reunification of Germany. It also addresses and dismantles common Russian propaganda narratives surrounding the topic. 1. Historical Background: The Roma...
Read more