Ukraine: Another Korea?

It is certainly within the realm of possbile outcomes to Putin's War on Ukraine. US officials see the possiblity of the conflict begin put into a "deep freeze" with both sides ceasing military operations, but neither side admiting to defeat or ending the war permanently. The 50+ year cease fire on the Korean Pennisula is the leading example of such an outcome. While not preferable, a long term cease fire would be politically acceptable to the United States and its western allies since no one in that camp wants a prolonged hot war. Officials confirmed they are planning for this end game. The long-touted Ukraine counteroffensive is unlikely to completely dislodge Russia from eastern Ukrainian territory, if it occurs, and an invasion of Crimea is simply too complex and costly for Ukraine to execute successfully.  Recall that Putin invaded Ukraine in a "special operation" when Ukraine was politically unable to resist. At a minimum, Ukraine needs to regain access to the Azov Sea and its ports before agreeing to any prolonged ceasefire.  That will require sufficient men and material to defeat 150,000 entrenched Russian troops. A difficult mission for any political leader to undertake.  Interstate wars that last more than a year historically last on average a decade with sporadic conflict. (e.g. Iran-Iraq War 1980-1990)

the ruins of Bakhmut

Contingency planning in war is normal. The US administration stresses that the shooting war will continue for some time, and during that time NATO has Ukraine's back. JCS Chair, Gen. Mark Milley, has repeatedly stated he thinks the war will end in a negotiated settlement. Transfers from exisiting US weapon stockpiles have decreased in recent months, while aid packages to purchase weapons from manufacturers has increased, indicating a shift in policy planning to the long-term. The imminent threat to Ukraine's existence as a nation has abated for now; its increased military capabilities are exhibited in its robust air-defense around Kyiv. (29 of 30 missiles in latest barrage claimed downed including hypersonic Kinzhal cruise missiles)  President Zelensky recently stated his nation needs more time and weaponry to launch its offensive, but his western allies are becoming skeptical while the carnage continues.

 *Daily Kos offers some hypothetical tactical moves Ukraine could make in an attempt to re-take Crimea.  While all good ideas (shipping interdiction, long-range missile strikes on ground targets, low-level air strikes against Black Sea Fleet ships launching Kalibr missiles, etc) these will not eliminate the need for ground forces to invade and occupy the peninsula.  Russia has too many high value military installations, as well as a large portion of ethnic Russians living there to abandon it without a fight.  Think of Crimea as a geographic castle, which if put to the siege, will resist until the walls are breached.  Sufficiently large airborne or amphibious assaults are beyond Ukraine's current military capability.  See below.  Only one practical land bridge to Crimea exists: the 5km wide Perekop Peninsula.   Defensive forces have been guarding it since the Greeks.  There is a large isthmus-wide ditch and earthen wall built by the Tartars in the late Middle Ages.  It has been used since then by both German and Soviet troops.  Although crossable by modern armor vehicles, it will certainly slow an advance especially if zeroed by Russian artillery and airstrikes.  And there are three more lines of defense beyond it.  Gen. Manstein's dismounted storm troopers took 1,000 casualties successfully beaching Soviet defensive lines in five days. The battle for Bakhmut has lasted eight months.  

 Then there is the citadel of Sevastopol with its naval and airbases.  Armed forces of Ukraine have already suffered an estimated 100,000+ casualties. Liberating Crimea could easily cost upwards of another 100,000, despite marginal advantages in western-supplied weapon systems, and assuming the war remains conventional. There are unconfirmed reports that teams of partisan saboteurs are operating in Belgorad Oblast, Russia.  A nuclear artillery storage facility is located just north of  Belgorad. and could be a target. 

 Color US Person skeptical.  F-16s will not win the war--blood and guts might. US Person is not opposed to allowing Ukraine to eventually use numerous F-16s, Grippens, Rafaels, or Typhoons supplied by European allies.  The 4.5G  F-16 model is being replaced by 5G fighters by some nations in the western alliance.  It takes time and resources to properly train fighter pilots and establish a logistical infrastructure to fight an advanced aircraft effectively.  For now (18 mos.), Ukraine should put its Air Force to the maximum effective use using familiar equipment, supplied western munitions, and existing logistics.  To repeat, the MiG-29 is not entirely obsolete, but is aging since its introduction in 1983.  Yes, its radar is outranged by more modern units.  But the Fulcrum was built to counter the F-16, no mean feat.

most of the Ukrainian Navy--the Yuri Olefirenko