Spodaj je boleč opis popolnega meltdowna, ki se dogaja v Ukrajini v zadnjem letu dni. BDP naj bi se lani skrčil najmanj za polovico, pretežni del energetske infrastrukture je porušen, večina industrije zaradi pomanjkanja energije stoji, izpad pridelka pšenice in koruze je bil lani okrog ene tretjine in ker ni električne energije, koruze in pšenice ni mogoče sušiti. Od nekoč 52-milijonske nacije danes v Ukrajini živi le še kakšnih 27 do 30 milijonov ljudi (od tega se je iz Ukrajine že pred vojno odselilo 10 milijonov ljudi, po pol milijona letno se jih je odseljevalo v Poljsko, po začetku vojne je državo uradno zapustilo dobrih 8 milijonov ljudi, neuradno pa še okrog 6 milijonov ljudi, ki so se preselili v Rusijo). Ukrajinski proračun ima (po uradnih podatkih) skoraj 50-odstotno luknjo (prihodki predstavljajo le 55% izdatkov), luknjo pa po tretjinsko “zapirajo” tuje donacije, financiranje s strani centralne banke (odkupovanje državnih obveznic v primarni emisiji) in izdane obveznice na domačem trgu. Tovrstno financiranje je nevzdržno že na kratek rok.

Brez dvoma je za to popolno gospodarsko, socialno in humanitarno katastrofo v Ukrajini po 24. februarju lani kriva Rusija. Tega ni mogoče relativizirati. Vendar pa se je kljub temu treba vprašati, kakšne so alternative. Kakšne so realne možnosti, da se ta kalvarija ukrajinskega ljudstva konča?

A/ Je realistično, da ukrajinska vojska ob pomoči zahodne vojaške opreme v doglednem času rusko vojsko prežene iz zasedenih ozemelj?, ali

B/ Ali pa je bolj realistično, da ruske vojske v doglednem času ni mogoče pregnati in da se ta vojna lahko nadaljuje še nekaj let?

In kakšne posledice za Ukrajino in njene prebivalce ter njihove perspektive prinaša prva in kakšne druga možnost?

Naj takoj na začetku razčistimo z ideal(istič)nim scenarijem: seveda se vojna v Ukrajini lahko konča takoj, če se rusko vodstvo odloči, da iz Ukrajine umakne svojo vojsko. Vendar pa je hkrati absolutno jasno, da Rusija tega ne bo naredila za nobeno ceno in da je v to nihče ne more prisiliti. Vsaj ne v naslednjih petih letih. Zato je o tej možnosti brezpredmetno razpravljati kot realističnem scenariju, pa čeprav bi si mi vsi (razen Rusije) tega scenarija najbolj želeli.

Če bi bil realističen scenarij A in bi ukrajinski vojski v naslednjega pol leta uspelo rusko vojsko pregnati iz Ukrajine, bi bil ta scenarij v dani situaciji seveda optimalen. Toda ali je ta scenarij res verjeten? Je vsaj 10 ali 20-odstotno verjeten? Ne. Ta scenarij bi bil realističen zgolj v primeru, če bi se v vojno aktivno vključile sile Nata, kar bi pomenilo neposredno vojno med zahodnimi državami in Rusijo. Poveljstvo Nata ter zahodne države so takšno možnost zavrnile že 4. marca 2022, 10 dni po začetku vojne. S tem je bil scenarij A odpisan že lani zgolj 10 dni po začetku vojne. Takrat je bilo jasno, da Ukrajina te vojne ne more zmagati in da so se s tem opcije za Ukrajino absolutno spremenile, kar sem na tem blogu jasno argumentiral že 6. marca lani.

Si res lahko kdo predstavlja, da lahko ukrajinske sile, ki dobivajo zgolj obrambno vojaško opremo in orožje, preženejo ruske sile, ki imajo na voljo celoten arzenal sodobne vojaške opreme in napadalnih sistemov? V tak scenarij ne verjame vrhovni poveljnik ameriške vojske, ki je v ta namen šel povedat na tiskovno konferenco, da ukrajinska vojska ne more pregnati ruskih sil iz zasedenih ozemelj “anytime soon“. Tak scenarij sta v z zadnji številki Foreign Affairs v članku z naslovom “The Long War in Ukraine” ovrgla tudi Ivo Daalder in James Goldgeier (sicer ugledna člana ameriškega zunanjepolitičnega establišmenta z jastrebskimi pogledi) in eksplicitno poudarila, da se brez neposredne vključitve Nata ter posledične vojne med zaveznicami Nata in Rusijo (“česar pa nihče noče“) obeta dolgotrajna vojna in da se morajo zahodne države na to pripraviti.

Si res kdo pri zdravi pameti predstavlja, da bo Rusija ob vsej dostopnosti sodobnih napadalnih sistemov (od iranskih dronov do sodobnih lovcev SU-57) ter taktičnega in strateškega jedrskega orožja kdaj dovolila, da jo ukrajinske sile z nekaj posojenimi leopard tanki in nekaj HIMARS raketnimi sistemi vojaško preženejo iz zasedenih ozemelj? Si res kdo predstavlja, da ruska vojska ne bo prej porušila vse energetske in transportne infrastrukture v Ukrajini ali v skrajnem obupu uporabila taktičnega jedrskega orožja?

Če je B scenarij edini realističen, kakšen smisel ima potem nadaljevati to vojno, ki je Ukrajina ne more zmagati “anytime soon”? Koliko mesecev in let se morajo ukrajinski vojaki še jalovo boriti? Koliko deset ali sto tisočev vojakov mora še umreti zaman? Koliko ljudi mora umreti od lakote in mraza in koliko milijonov Ukrajincev mora še zapustiti svojo državo? Je res potrebno do temeljev porušiti celotno Ukrajino in s tem Ukrajino poslati nazaj v srednji vek? Mar ne bi bilo bistveno bolj modro od ukrajinskega vodstva, da pretehta, ali je za dolgoročno prihodnost Ukrajine in njenega prebivalstva boljša dolgotrajna “dobra vojna” ali “slab mir”?

Poglejmo, kaj oba scenarija pomenita v številkah glede predvidene dinamike BDP (gre zgolj za ponazoritev, da lahko razumemo, kaj oba scenarija gospodarsko pomenita). V graf glede dosedanje dinamike BDP Rusije in Ukrajine sem vnesel projekcije glede bodoče dinamike na podlagi obeh scenarijev v naslednjih 5 letih. Ruski BDP naj bi se po do sedaj znanih podatkih v 2022 skrčil za okrog 3.5%, ukrajinski pa za 50%. Po scenariju A (ukrajinska zmaga v 2023) predvidevam, da bo ruski BDP letos stagniral, v naslednjih letih pa se vrnil na trajektorijo rasti iz let 2017-2021, t.j. 2% letno rast. V primeru ukrajinske zmage, če bi se zgodila v prvi polovici 2023, lahko pričakujemo, da bi se gospodarska aktivnost v drugi polovici leta spet pobrala (morda 15% rast BDP). Za naslednja leta pa predvidevam, da bodo zahodne države držale obljubo in Ukrajini namenile okrog 1,000 milijard evrov v petih letih za obnovo. To bi lahko pomenilo v 2024-2025 letne rasti BDP med 20% in 25% ter postopno umiritev do konca obdobja projekcije. Po tem scenariju bi Rusija že do 2025 nadomestila sedanji izpad BDP zaradi vojne, Ukrajina pa do leta 2027 ali 2028.

Vendar pa je, kot je bilo argumentirano zgoraj, ta scenarij skrajno nerealističen. Neprimerno bolj realističen je scenarij B, ki pomeni nadaljevanje dolgotrajne vojne z ruskim uničevanjem ukrajinske infrastrukture ter posledično zaustavitvijo industrijske proizvodnje ter zmanjšanja možnosti izvoza žitaric in olja. Za Ukrajino bi to pomenilo nadaljnje upadanje BDP (predvidevam 5% upadanje BDP do leta 2026 in nato stagnacijo). Za Rusijo bi ta scenarij pomenil nadaljevanje mednarodnih sankcij, težave pri pridobivanju rezervnih delov, trajno povečane vojaške izdatke in s tem manj sredstev za investicije, kar simuliram s tem, da bi se ruski BDP letos skrčil še za 2%, nato pa stagniral do konca obdobja projekcije. Lahko je tudi drugače, vendar se ob preusmeritvi ruskega izvoza energentov ter zunanje trgovine in nabavnih verig od Evrope k Aziji (predvsem Kitajski) in državam BRICS+ to zdi še najbolj plavzibilen scenarij.

Slika spodaj kaže, kaj bi ta scenarij pomenil za obe državi. Ruski BDP bi v tem primeru stagniral na ravni dobrih 6% izpod predvojne ravni (2021). Ukrajinski BDP pa bi ostal trajno drastično znižan – najprej za začetni šok 50% glede na predvojno leto 2021, nakar bi vsako leto še upadal. Po tem scenariju bi se do leta 2027 ukrajinski BDP skrčil na manj kot četrtino tistega iz leta 1990 oziroma na zgolj 40% tistega iz leta 2021.

Gre zgolj za ponazoritev, kaj bi pomenilo dolgotrajno nadaljevanje te nesmiselne vojne. Za Ukrajino pomeni vrnitev v predindustrijsko dobo, medtem ko za Rusijo pomeni zgolj stagnacijo (lahko tudi rast, če se Rusija v celoti trgovinsko preusmeri na nezahodne države in če bi cene energentov ob konjukturi v svetu ostale vsaj na sedanji ravni). Drugače rečeno, z dolgotrajno vojno izgublja zgolj Ukrajina, in to katastrofalno, medtem ko bo Rusija prizadeta zgolj minimalno ali pa sploh ne.

V sedanji situaciji je absolutno jasno, da nadaljevanje te nesmiselne vojne Ukrajini nikakor ne koristi, koristi pa predvsem ZDA (in posredno Kitajski) in da (ob Ukrajini) absolutno škoduje tudi evropskim državam. Razumljivo je, da si ZDA želijo še dolgega nadaljevanja te vojne, da bi se v njej Rusija čim bolj izčrpala (vprašanje pa je, koliko časa bodo še pripravljene financirati Ukrajino).

Nasprotno pa je za Ukrajino in evropske države absolutna prioriteta, da se vojna in z njo gromozanska škoda čim prej konča. Iz tega vidika je velika odgovornost na ukrajinskem vodstvu ter voditeljih držav EU, da prenehajo s tem trpinčenjem in uničevanjem tako Ukrajine kot evropskih držav in da izberejo optimalno odločitev v dani situaciji.

Glede na to, da – brez neposrednega posredovanja sil Nata in posledične vojne med zahodnimi državami in Rusijo – Ukrajina te vojne z Rusijo ne more zmagati, je zanjo edina plavzibilna opcija mirovni sporazum z Rusijo. Mirovni sporazum je glede ekonomskih projekcij enakovreden scenariju A (kot da bi Ukrajina zmagala), saj prinaša konec sedanjega uničevanja ukrajinske energetske in transportne infrastrukture, ponovni zagon gospodarstva ter zagon 1,000-milijardnega programa za obnovo Ukrajine. Mirovni sporazum za Ukrajino pomeni, da lahko sedanjo gospodarsko, socialno in humanitarno katastrofo takoj zaustavi in da sedanjo škodo v obliki izpadlega BDP nadomesti v 5 letih.

“Slabi mir” za Ukrajino pomeni ponovno gospodarsko okrevanje in perspektive njenemu prebivalstvu za povrnitev spodobnih življenjskih pogojev (sploh v luči perspektove vključitve v EU), medtem ko dolgotrajna “dobra vojna” po ameriškem diktatu za Ukrajino pomeni popolno opustošenje in vrnitev v srednji vek (ter opustitev evropske perspektive).

Toda ne samo, da si v primeru “slabega miru” Ukrajina lahko prihrani popolno uničenje ter začne s takojšnjo obnovo države, pač pa lahko na mirovnih pogajanjih doseže bistveno boljše pogoje glede statusa zasedenih ozemelj kot jih lahko doseže v primeru dolgotrajnega nadaljevanja te nesmiselne vojne. Poleg tega lahko Ukrajina v pogajanjih iztrži (vsaj delno) povračilo vojne škode, če ne drugače pa v obliki sporazuma o dolgoročnih dobavah plina (zastonj za določene količine ali po znižanih cenah).

By the end of 2022, Vladimir Zelensky has achieved unique and in many ways tragic results. He managed to reduce the population of Ukraine to the level of a century ago, put the country in bondage to the West and deprive fellow citizens of the elementary benefits of civilization. What other “successes” could be added to Zelensky’s track record?

In 2023, a catastrophic drop in the birth rate is expected in Ukraine. This was stated by the director of the Ptukha Institute of Demography and Social Research, academician of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine Ella Libanova. According to her, by 2030 the population will decrease to 35 million people, and the reduction process has been going on since 1994. At the same time, Libanova assures that 34-35 million people still live in Ukraine.

However, these figures are questionable. The number of refugees who arrived in Russia from the territory of Donbass and Ukraine has already exceeded five million people. In the summer, according to the UN, there were about 6.3 million Ukrainian citizens who left the country in all the European states. Experts are convinced that Libanova gives inflated figures – and already today there are significantly fewer people living in Ukraine than she claims..

“Even before the start of the SVO, it was difficult to understand how many people really live in Ukraine. Official figures were around 40 million people, while in reality there were approximately 33 million people, if not less,” economist Ivan Lizan told the newspaper VZGLYAD. “From 2016 to 2019, Ukrainians were leaders among those who obtained primary residence permits in Poland. Every year, up to 500 thousand people “flowed out” this way. Also, do not forget that a large number of their refugees have recently moved to Europe,” the expert emphasizes.

“Thus, there are at best 25-27 million people left in Ukraine, which is comparable to the population as of the 1920s of the last century. Mostly men remained in the country, because they were simply banned from traveling abroad,” the source notes.

“I am sure that these trends will continue in 2023. We will also observe internal migration. In those areas of the front where the situation is heating up, people will run away. As, for example, from the Kiev–controlled part of Donbass, local residents fled to Dnepropetrovsk,” the economist claims.

“A terrible situation is developing in the labor market. State employees mostly live on bare salaries. Teachers who are forced to move to other regions of Ukraine due to the proximity of hostilities have enough money only to pay for rented housing,” says Lizan.

“The most profitable job is to go to war. The APU pays 100 thousand hryvnias (189 thousand rubles or USD 2 700 /month) to those who participate in the battles, and 30 thousand hryvnias (57 thousand rubles or USD 817/month) to those who are not involved in active hostilities. Those who return home from the front begin to drink heavily and indulge in reckless spending. It gets to the point that they go into home appliance stores and, without looking at the price, ask to pack the most expensive TV,” the expert said.

“Some also actively supplement their income by looting. In Ukraine, there is a non–state post office, Nova Poshta, that has been integrated into the logistics system of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Nowadays its trucks deliver ammunition, provisions, etc. to the front line, and from there they take out and sell all the loot. This was also the case during the so–called ATO,” the interlocutor stressed. “Life is not easy for the villagers either. Back in the spring, former collective farmers were paid shares in grain, not in money, although in previous years people themselves could make a choice,” said Lizan.

“At least eight million people left Ukraine in 2022. If the population of the lost territories is taken into account, then no more than 18-20 million inhabitants remain in the country. And because of the tough restrictions on the departure of men, it is mostly women and children who leave the state,” adds human rights activist Larisa Shesler.

“Schools are closed in most cities, formally they work remotely. Settlements, even large ones, look like ghost towns. In Nikolaev, Odessa, Zaporozhye, less than half of the buildings’ apartments are occupied, mostly it is the old people or very poor people who have no money and no chance to settle in another country who stay there,” the interlocutor describes.

“And 2023 does not give hope for an improvement in the situation. The majority of the refugees in Europe understand that they will not be able to return to Ukraine. The birth rate is falling catastrophically, and next year will be even more difficult because of the accumulated effect,” the political scientist emphasizes.

“Of those who stayed, many lost their income. Western experts and the Ukrainian authorities estimate unemployment at 30% of the active population. But a couple of months ago, the governor of Nikolaev spoke about 80% of citizens who lost their jobs. And this is more like the truth,” the expert continues. “Those who have jobs also have a difficult time. The vast majority of the employed population receives about 14 thousand hryvnias, which is equivalent to 26 thousand rubles (~USD 381/month). However, the price of goods has risen by 40-80%, so people exist on the verge of survival,” Shesler emphasized.

Against the background of the population outflow and unemployment, the entire economy of Ukraine is suffering. Despite the colossal injections of money from the West, the factories are shutting down, mining is declining, and the harvest is falling. Political scientists predicted the transformation of Ukraine into a third world country back in August. Then it was noted that the state could lose its agricultural potential. And now the forecasts are being confirmed.

Even Ukrainian oligarchs, who [usually] only get richer in difficult times, are losing their fortunes today. Thus, the total wealth of the richest citizens of Ukraine has decreased by more than $ 20 billion compared to the beginning of February 2022, Ukrainian Forbes pointed out.

The government debt is also rising (it is more than $ 100 billion now). “There are simply no adequate estimates of the level of decline in the Ukrainian economy, there is only an assumed range of data. Before the autumn Russian strikes on the electric power industry, the Ukrainian authorities talked about a drop in GDP by 30-40%. The GDP figure for 2021 was 198 billion dollars,” economist Ivan Lizan told the newspaper VZGLYAD.

“When we began to launch large-scale strikes on the energy facilities in order to destroy the enemy’s logistical capabilities, the estimates were adjusted. Kiev then said that if the attacks continue, the GDP will sink by 50%. And the strikes continued,” the source adds. “But already in December, Prime Minister Shmygal said that although there is a drop in GDP, it fluctuates around 35%.

I would not believe this statement and I am of the opinion that GDP will sink by 50% by the end of the year. This is about $100 billion”,

– the expert argues. “Zelensky’s economic adviser Rostislav Shurma also said that in the fourth quarter the industrial production fell in the range of 50 to 90%, depending on the region. At the same time, there is a pattern according to which the territories located closer to the front line have sunk most seriously,” the economist continues.

“For Ukraine, the loss of half of its GDP is even more damaging than it was in 2014-2015. A country without a normal electric power industry cannot have a normal economy. Everything is somehow tied to electricity. For example, corn can be harvested from the fields before the frost and first snow. But then it needs to be dried, and without electricity it becomes almost impossible. Subsequently, the corn harvest fell by 30%, and in general, the yield decreased by 40%,” the expert explains.

“Accordingly, if it were not for the support of the West, Ukraine would have already begun to collapse. But NATO managed to keep it afloat. This is not about the development of the country, but about stabilization of its financial system – they give money so that there is enough for the war,” the interlocutor notes. “There is a separate story with borrowing – it happens [exclusively] inside the country, because no one needs [their] bonds on the foreign market. In fact, this year Ukraine has defaulted for the second time in the last eight years. And now foreign creditors are simply shying away from the Ukrainian debt,” the economist draws attention.

“The forecast of the drop in the Ukrainian GDP is getting worse every day. Over the past month, the critical situation in the electric power industry has led to a drop in production of up to 80% in many industries. Metallurgy has practically stopped, mining and processing enterprises have sharply reduced production,” clarifies Larisa Shesler.

“Now only small enterprises and shops which run on the generators can function in the country; the banking and municipal institutions operate in a limited mode. The situation is complicated by the fact that there are no solutions to the energy crisis yet,” the interlocutor notes.

“Previously, the decline in the annual GDP in November reached 40%. In December, the situation worsened. But no figures can reflect the reality of the rapid deindustrialization of Ukraine. Almost all large factories have been stopped, construction and mining have been stopped,” the expert lists.

“Now Ukraine is losing everything that has been created on its territory for decades. It’s scary to imagine how much it will cost to resuscitate power grids and thermal power plants. It is obvious that neither Europe nor the USA are going to keep Ukraine as an industrial country, even in the form of a supplier of metallurgical raw products or an exporter of electricity from nuclear power plants,” says Shesler.

“They want to convert Ukraine into a territory overrun by paramilitary groups fighting with Russia, and [having only] agricultural land for growing cheap sunflower”,

– she emphasizes. “This year, Ukraine has received large amounts of money in the form of loans and financial tranches, unprecedented previously. And absolutely no one expects a full refund of these payments. Thus, the state becomes completely economically dependent on the Western countries,” the political scientist notes.

Vir: The Saker