The evolution of the war in Ukraine It is not explained only on the battlefield. Behind the front, the economy—and particularly the performance of energy markets—plays a decisive role in Russia’s ability to maintain its offensive. This is what political analyst Volodymyr Fesenko maintains, who points to the close relationship between oil revenues and the Kremlin’s financial resilience.
In his analysis, the expert highlights that The international context has at certain times favored Moscow. Increased tension in key regions such as the Persian Gulf has caused increases in the price of crude oil, which translates into higher income for Russia. This rebound has allowed the country partially cushion the impact of Western sanctions and continue financing their war machinery.
However, this advantage is fragile and depends on external factors. Fesenko warns that eventual stabilization in the Middle East—especially if friction with Iran eases—could cause oil prices to fall again. If this scenario occurs, The Russian economy, already showing signs of wear, would come under additional pressure. Less energy revenue would mean less room to sustain the military effort in the long term.
A war without a clear calendar
Beyond the economic variables, the analyst insists on the enormous uncertainty surrounding the conflict. In his opinion, no world leader is in a position to anticipate when the end of the war will come.. Neither from kyiv nor from Moscow, nor from other influential capitals, is there a clear roadmap that allows setting deadlines.
Fesenko mentions that key figures in international politics, from Ukrainian officials to top leaders in other powers, lack a reliable forecast for the duration of the conflict. The reason is simple: Wars, especially those of attrition, evolve based on multiple variables that constantly change.
The expert emphasizes that this type of prolonged confrontations tend to progressively erode both sides. Both Ukraine and Russia are paying a high cost, not only in human terms, but also economic and social. And this dynamic, far from being resolved quickly, could last for years.
In this sense, Fesenko warns that it is useless to try to project medium-term scenarios with too much precision. The horizon of 2027 or 2028, he points out, is still a total unknown. The only thing clear is that the conflict will continue to have a profound impact on both countries, regardless of how it evolves in the military field.
Negotiations without immediate outcome
Regarding possible diplomatic solutions, the analyst considers that talks between the parties will continue in the coming months. Nevertheless, is skeptical about the possibility of reaching a peace agreement in the short term.
According to his forecast, it is likely that there will be contacts, proposals and even partial progress, but without a definitive agreement materializing to end the hostilities. The distance between the positions of both sides remains considerable, making any quick solution difficult.
Fesenko leaves the door open to unexpected events that could alter the course of the conflict, although he considers them unlikely in the current scenario. If trends continue, he notes, a solid agreement cannot be expected until at least well into the fall, and possibly not even before the end of the year.
Thus, the war continues trapped in a logic of prolonged resistance, where factors such as the price of oil, economic capacity and global geopolitical evolution weigh as well as military decisions.
