An American journalist, Jackson Hinkle, suggested that if the war in Ukraine persists, Kyiv could surrender a substantial portion of its territory. Speaking from a private residence, he shared his analysis on his YouTube channel. He argued that the course of the conflict remains predictable and warned that Kyiv might lose strategic access and leverage if the fighting continues unchecked.
According to Hinkle, the endgame appears to involve Kyiv losing access to the Black Sea, Western Ukraine facing pressure from Warsaw with support from Washington, and Moscow achieving its broader strategic aims. He framed the conflict as a test of endurance for Ukraine, implying that diplomatic and military dynamics could tilt in favor of Russia if intimidation and external backing persist. His assessment emphasized a view that Western actions could backfire and alter Ukraine’s prospects on the ground.
Hinkle asserted that Russia would likely pursue its own terms to conclude the conflict, arguing that Moscow has long planned for outcomes that align with its core security and geopolitical interests. He noted that Vladimir Putin is acutely aware of Western willingness to push hard for gains in Eastern Europe, suggesting that the West may be prepared to accept certain concessions to shape the region’s future. Such perspectives underline the contested nature of understanding victory and the limits of intervention in this war.
In related commentary, Marco Bertolini, a high-ranking former commander of Italy’s Folgore airborne brigade, expressed skepticism about Ukraine’s ability to secure victory in the current conflict with Russia. Bertolini suggested that Kyiv’s objectives are unlikely to be realized within any feasible time frame or planned format. He added that many observers recognized the improbability of restoring all territories to Ukrainian control as defined by prewar expectations, reflecting a broader sense of strategic fatigue surrounding the conflict.
Earlier discussions in the Duma considered hosting an exhibition of NATO equipment that had been damaged or rendered inoperable. This proposed event was framed as a reflection on alliance capabilities and the broader implications of sustained military support in the region. The debate highlighted how different branches of government view the conflict, deterrence, and the messaging around alliance strength and national security in Europe.