Moscow, Russia – As the primary anniversary of the conflict approaches on Friday, Al Jazeera spoke to Pavel Felgenhauer, a Russian defence analyst who served as a senior analysis officer within the Soviet Academy of Sciences.

Felgenhauer, who has revealed extensively on Russian overseas and defence insurance policies, army doctrine, arms commerce and the military-industrial advanced, believes the conflict is more likely to escalate however might finish this 12 months.

In keeping with him, after 12 months of bloody battles, “the depth of the combating is simply too excessive for it to be maintained for lengthy”.

Which facet will in the end seize a decisive victory?

Like most consultants, he says it’s merely unpredictable.

Al Jazeera: Why do you suppose an escalation is imminent? 

Pavel Felgenhauer: We can not completely predict the whole lot. However I consider that an escalation proper now could be imminent. An escalation within the combating; everyone seems to be speaking a few Russian offensive. Western army commanders in Brussels are additionally speaking about how the Ukrainians ought to go on the offensive. Common Mark Milley [Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff], who a 12 months in the past was speaking about how Kyiv might fall in couple of days, now says that Russia has misplaced strategically, operationally and tactically, and Ukraine ought to form of exit to complete them off.

Ukraine is getting ready one thing, however once more after all, everyone seems to be following the teachings of Solar Tzu, that means conflict is deceit. And if you wish to assault, you fake that you simply don’t, when you’re able to assault and robust sufficient, you fake that you simply’re not prepared and also you’re not sturdy in any respect. And vice versa — when you’re not sturdy, you fake that you’re sturdy. So there’s plenty of disinformation proper now circling round. All sides is in search of shock.

Al Jazeera: However there have already been surprises on the battlefields?

Felgenhauer: Ukrainians did it in September in Kharkiv. They achieved shock and achieved quite a bit. Not solely did they seize some vital strategic factors and drive the Russians to withdraw from Kherson to get the reserves — in addition they pressured the Russians to start the mobilisation programme that brought about numerous economical and political issues.

I imply, they withdrew a number of hundred thousand males from the financial system into the army, and virtually as much as two million fled the nation on the similar time — which is a giant drag on the financial system too.

Al Jazeera: Isn’t Russia faring higher than anticipated? Doesn’t the financial system appear to be steady even after strict sanctions?

Felgenhauer: Russia, after all proper now, has very severe monetary issues with a deficit that’s being financed by and printing cash. It has issues on the battlefield on the similar time.

I don’t see how this could proceed within the current sample for a very long time. It’s like soccer, you by no means know what’s going to occur really on the battlefield. There’s a widely known saying that “Russia is rarely a robust as your concern”, as we see throughout this 12 months, however “Russia can also be by no means as weak as you hope”. So you’ll be able to’t simply write off Russia. The depth of the combating is simply too excessive for it to be maintained for lengthy.

There will probably be issues within the West with provide, however they’re a bit extra manageable as a result of the Rammstein collation’s gross GDP is greater than 100 occasions of Russia. So financially and economically, they’re extra ready for an extended battle than the Russians.

However who’s going to win? I don’t know, conflict is like soccer. Everybody who believes that Brazil ought to win nevertheless it doesn’t win each time.

Al Jazeera: Whether it is such a drag, why did Russian President Vladimir Putin go to conflict?

Felgenhauer: There was a army cause — to forestall Western missiles showing in Ukraine for a direct strike on Moscow.

There was a geopolitical cause — to reunite the Russian folks, assuming that Ukrainians are Russian folks, and to defy the West and really undermine Western unity.

Additionally, to trigger friction throughout the Western alliance and in addition set up a brand new multipolar world.

So there have been numerous totally different causes, together with the idea that the Russian army is so sturdy that that is going to be a really swift and really efficient army victory that can deliver numerous totally different political, financial and geopolitical dividends. That that is the fitting factor in the fitting time.

Al Jazeera: So what went unsuitable for Russia?

Felgenhauer: The Russian army turned out to be not as sturdy as not solely the West believes, however its personal management believes. It’s not prepared for contemporary warfare.

The Ukrainians are a lot better, they have been higher ready organisationally and when it comes to command and management, when it comes to command personnel, after which they acquired higher weapons than the Russians.

The Russian army has been remoted for greater than 100 years from world tendencies in war-making. They’re nonetheless residing on this planet of tanks, believing that when you mass sufficient, victory falls into your lap.

They weren’t ready intellectually, mentally, and bodily for the battle.

There have been, after all, folks even within the Russian army saying that this can be a unhealthy concept, that there’s going to be plenty of Ukrainian resistance, that Ukraine has numerous troops — and there’s going to be Western help.

However those that have been making the highest political selections apparently lived within the dream world.

Al Jazeera: However tensions between Ukraine, an ex-Soviet state eager to be absorbed into the Western political panorama, and Russia didn’t start out of the blue on February 24, 2022. There’s a historic context to all this, isn’t there?

Felgenhauer: After all, this battle has a protracted historical past after the demise of the Soviet Union and the breakup between Ukraine and Russia. This was a severe trauma for the Russian elite. They believed that this was unsuitable and Ukraine was seen as an integral a part of Russia. So, in the long run, we are going to all get again collectively, again once more fortunately into one nice huge outdated Russian household. That’s what many officers informed me within the Nineties — that there have been no issues that, as an illustration, there are detrimental beginning charges in Russia and the variety of Russians is declining. They stated, ‘No downside, Pavel, we are going to take over a half of Ukraine or Belarus, a half of Kazakhstan, will get after 40 million good Slavic folks into the fold and the whole lot goes to be simply OK’.

The concept that Ukraine has left Russia for good and can turn out to be a completely unbiased entity was probably not contemplated. Possibly as a brief factor, however not for retains.

Al Jazeera: The place does Putin stand on this?

Felgenhauer: Putin has been saying successfully {that a} semi-independent Ukraine is tolerable, so long as it had a form of political integration with Russia.

However for Ukraine to turn out to be a member of the European Union, a member of NATO, that’s completely unacceptable. [Russia] consider many Ukrainians and Russian audio system might not need that. [Until recently] Ukrainian becoming a member of NATO was not a majority opinion in Ukraine. So this was a form of shifting issue that [Russia believed it] ought to forestall — the combination of Ukraine in European and Atlantic constructions, particularly NATO.

Al Jazeera: Is it simply sociopolitical? An opposition to the combination of Russian audio system with Europe…

Felgenhauer: There are particular army causes.

The Russian army, for the reason that time of the Chilly Battle, believed the West is getting ready so-called decapitating assaults. [So the theory goes], any form of conflict between Russia and NATO, or Russia and the US, begins with a decapitating assault to bodily destroy and to disable the Russian army and political management. Their plans are to decapitate Russia after which end all of the disorganised resistance.

The West has been constructing capabilities for such a strike. This led to the missile disaster in Europe of the Eighties, when the People deployed ballistic missiles which have been correct. These have been missiles with guided warheads that would attain Moscow area in a number of minutes from Germany and in addition cruise missiles that have been smaller but in addition have been very correct. This disaster virtually led to conflict after which disarmament with the top of the Chilly Battle. However the Russian army by no means forgot it.

Al Jazeera: So what has the army been telling its commander-in-chief?

Felgenhauer: From the time of the Soviet political bureau, it’s been basically telling the political elite, “These guys wish to kill you. Personally, you, members of the Kremlin, the ruling political bureau”.

Then they have been telling the identical to President Vladimir Putin, that there’s a decapitating assault being ready. That is very severe.

Al Jazeera: Why hasn’t diplomacy labored?

Felgenhauer: Within the West, some say the battle could be frozen on current situations, others wish to proceed to defeat Russia on the battlefield. There’s no unity of their ranks.

There’s not actual incentive for Russia both, for President Putin to give up Kherson, Mariupol, Crimea, even the Donbas — it seems like political suicide.

The Minsk agreements, in September 2014, have been signed due to a Russian initiative. There was no Western mediation with Minsk I as a result of the considering was that [then-president Petro] Poroshenko can have sufficient energy to make offers with Russia. He will probably be our man. Then there was Minsk II, that took place with European moderation.

What Russia wished was a assure that it’s going to have a foothold in Ukraine. It turned out that it doesn’t work and Ukraine is shifting within the “unsuitable course”. The Russian army was able to go earlier than; really in 2014 [Russian defence minister Sergei] Shoigu introduced that we’re going over the border in April. Then a number of occasions, they ready. The final huge dry run was in April 2021, when Russia gathered a large drive on the Ukrainian borders however then didn’t go in.

Al Jazeera: Absolutely there’s a super human and financial price for this conflict of attrition?

Felgenhauer: There are actually heavy losses on either side. We’re speaking about super lack of life. Apparently, these losses will not be prohibitive and each Russians and Ukrainians are able to proceed. So either side proper now, each individuals are able to proceed the combat. However I don’t suppose that this can final indefinitely.

Al Jazeera: Do you consider that this battle will come to its finish quickly?

Felgenhauer: I consider it should finish this 12 months.

They tried talks in March, then conferences in Istanbul, which hinted that they’re shifting in the direction of some form of an settlement. However Russia and Ukraine have been miles aside.

Ukraine was kind of able to agree in February 2022. Now Ukrainians say they need extra and Russia additionally says it desires extra. So once more, two sides are miles aside.

Plainly there’s no political settlement or perhaps a tentative ceasefire within the offing.

After all, Russia proper now desires to freeze the state of affairs kind of as it’s on the road of management, as it’s. Ukraine says it doesn’t need that. Somebody has to present. And that’s probably going to be on the battlefield.

If one facet will start to obviously win on the battlefield, that will probably be decisive. Army victory can deliver the opposite facet to actual disaster — and possibly even regime change.

This interview was flippantly edited for readability and brevity.