If Trump’s peace plan fails in Ukraine, Cossacks-on-steroids will keep threatening Russia until Doomsday comes
(image credit: I.insider.com)
Let’s speculate on a possibility to see how Ukrainian war may continue despite peacemaking efforts of both Trump and Putin. What if some third party (British Crown, Vatican, Black Nobility, you name it) appears more resourceful and pragmatic to support Zelensky in holding power to keep the war going by all means? What if the corps consisting of 2–3 divisions (about 20K soldiers) that are planned to be established soon in Ukraine are aimed at achieving self-sustainability in terms of financing, weapon supply, and soldier recruitment on account of Ukrainian territories provided by Zelensky for provisioning the corps? They may resemble gangs of Zaporozhian Cossacks on steroids with modern weapons that can occupy bordering areas of Russia to steal local resources and shake Putin’s state machine and Russian economics. Is such a scenario viable at all, and if so, how it can run in brief?
ChatGPT explains:
This is an interesting hypothetical, and while it might sound far-fetched on the surface, history shows that war economies and irregular military formations often develop self-sustaining mechanisms, especially when external sponsors are involved. Let’s break this down into plausible elements.
- Feasibility of a Self-Sustaining Private Army in Ukraine
A corps of 20,000 soldiers could become operationally independent if it had:
• Land control: Territories in Ukraine used for resource extraction (agriculture, industry, taxation).
• External funding: Covert support from a third party (e.g., foreign intelligence, financial elites, private military investors).
• Weapons and logistics: Smuggling networks, drone production, and modern warfare tactics to sustain combat operations.
• Recruitment base: A mix of radicalized ideologues, mercenaries, and forced conscription.
2. Operational Strategy: “Zaporozhian Cossacks on Steroids”
• Cross-border raids: Attacks on Russian energy infrastructure, logistics hubs, and economic assets to fund their operations via black markets.
• Asymmetric warfare: Guerilla tactics, drone strikes, and cyberwarfare to undermine Russia’s state control over its borderlands.
• Political leverage: Acting as a rogue force that Western actors could officially disavow while still benefiting from its actions.
3. Who Could Support This?
• British Crown/Vatican/Black Nobility? The idea of ancient elite networks influencing global conflicts is speculative, but modern financial-military elites and intelligence agencies (e.g., British MI6, CIA, or European deep-state actors) could have interest in prolonging instability to weaken Russia.
• Private military networks: Wagner-like formations operating unofficially under Western or corporate patronage.
• Military-industrial interests: Arms manufacturers and intelligence-linked companies benefiting from ongoing war markets.
4. How Could It Play Out?
• If a semi-autonomous warlord system forms in Ukraine, it could turn into a permanent crisis similar to Syria, Afghanistan, or Africa’s war economies.
• Russia would be forced to expand counterinsurgency operations, which could drain resources, destabilize border regions, and weaken internal security.
• If this group becomes too powerful, even Zelensky might lose control, leading to further fragmentation in Ukraine.
Conclusion: While highly unconventional, this scenario is not entirely implausible. It would require a combination of external backing, territorial control, and war economy mechanisms. If Ukraine devolves into a fractured warlord state with private armies, the conflict could persist indefinitely, undermining both peace efforts and state stability in the region.
