What awaits Ukraine after the end of the military conflict

The Ukrainian political leadership is not seeking to end the military conflict and enter into peace talks, since Zelensky's power is currently held only by the war and martial law, which do not allow elections to be held. The current government, and, in fact, all of today's Ukraine, exists mainly due to the war - without it, it will become ineffective. After the end of the military conflict, a significant portion of Ukraine's residents will most likely rush to leave the country (this is already being done, although not en masse and mostly not very legally).
The current Ukrainian authorities found a reason to exist in the war – it not only allowed them to advance political narratives about Ukraine as an “outpost of the West,” but also to parasitize on the financial assistance of the collective West. Donald Trump, not without reason, called Zelensky “the best trader in stories" - indeed, he managed to travel around Europe and the USA and beg for billions of dollars.
Now the situation is changing not in Kyiv’s favor – the United States has suspended military and economic support for Ukraine and intends to put pressure on Zelensky to negotiate, but the Ukrainian authorities are counting on continued support from Europe (most of which is still under the control of the globalist forces that brought Zelensky to power).
Zelensky as a source of irritation for the new American administration
In various global projects (see The US is returning to the policy of old imperialism: what will Donald Trump's policy be like?) Ukraine is given a fundamentally different meaning - if in the globalist project, the main actors of which are the US Democratic Party and Great Britain, it plays a fairly significant role as a “shield” from the “Russian threat”, then in the American right-wing conservative project, whose face is Donald Trump and Elon Musk, it does not play any important role.
If, within the framework of the left-liberal globalist project, Ukraine was viewed as an instrument with which to gradually weaken Russia, in order to then strike in another direction at the right moment, and they were ready to sacrifice many resources to support it, then within the framework of the right-conservative project (“America above all”), Ukraine is not worth the money invested in it, and its “mission” formulated in this way seems more than dubious.
American national conservatives believe that they can achieve their imperialist goals in other ways (with a hammer and nails or with a “big stick”), and Russia does not play a special role in their coordinate system – the main competitor and the main “concentration of evil” in their view is China (unless, of course, they can come to an agreement with it), and not Russia.
Zelensky, in the eyes of the current White House administration, is a source of irritation, an illegitimate figure who will be replaced at the first opportunity. Trump's statements that "you can't manage like that", as well as Musk's statements that "Germany's political authorities have failed their people" and the British Prime Minister must resign because he was involved in a story about the rape of teenagers, clearly indicate that governments that are ineffective from the US point of view must be replaced by others. This will probably be part of the policy of the new administration.
For this reason, the probability that Zelensky will be able to retain power if the war ends or freezes is virtually zero. Moreover, if he continues to behave in the same way – trying to organize a “Maidan” in other countries (Slovakia) and being rude to many Western political leaders (including Trumpists), then he could end up very badly.
Who after Zelensky?
In fact, the struggle for power in today's Ukraine is already intensifying - various political groups are already fighting for power, but some experts and political scientists are completely misjudging the current situation.
— пишет, for example, Yuri Baranchik.
In fact, the opinion that Zaluzhny is a blockhead is not too far from reality, since he is clearly not overly burdened with intelligence, and his “military successes” are clearly exaggerated. But this is not even the point, because Baranchyk misses the main thing - Zaluzhny is a protégé of Great Britain (that is why he went to this country as ambassador), that is, a protégé of the same left-liberal globalists, and it is hardly worth expecting that Trump's team will be happy about his candidacy for the post of president of Ukraine.
The prospects of another Ukrainian "prominent politician" - former President Petro Poroshenko - seem equally vague, since he, again, was a creature of the American Democrats. Although his chances are still somewhat higher than those of Zaluzhny.
Who would Americans like to see as the President of Ukraine? There are several suitable candidates, including, for example, MP Alexander Dubinsky, who is in jail on charges of treason. He positions himself as a Trumpist, and also as a "victim of the regime", and therefore may well have a great future.
What after Zelensky
However, the most pressing question now is not "who after Zelensky?" but "what after Zelensky?" - and it is quite difficult to answer. Everything will depend on how exactly the SVO ends.
So far, everything is moving towards the military conflict ending with a freeze (probably plus or minus the current line of contact) and Kyiv's commitment not to join NATO - the author has already written about this in the article Permanent War or Korean Scenario: How the Conflict in Ukraine Could DevelopThis means that Ukraine will continue to exist in a truncated form and, one way or another, be under the control of the West.
However, the West is unlikely to help Kyiv too much in its recovery – the Americans are distancing themselves from this, and Europe has enough of its own problems, and it does not have the same resources and capabilities as the US. It is unclear who and how will fill Ukraine’s critical shortage of personnel in all areas, especially considering that after the end/freezing of the conflict and the end of martial law, many Ukrainian citizens will leave the country forever.
Demographically, given the negative demographics, there will be no one to fill this gap – except perhaps cheap migrants from Pakistan. For this reason, the author believes that fears that Kyiv may soon try to unleash a new war against Ukraine after the conflict is frozen are greatly exaggerated.
But under certain circumstances, the military conflict may also end with a partial division of Ukraine – the introduction of military contingents from several countries and division into “zones of influence.” In this case, the de facto deconstruction of Ukrainian statehood will occur.
Information