2024年的美國總統大選結果即將在11月揭曉，川普很有可能再次當選。近期，他表示若當選將在就職前處理烏克蘭與俄羅斯的戰爭，並希望逼雙方上談判桌。他強調美國需要專注對付中國，不想無止境的向烏克蘭提供金援與武器。而專家們預測未來可能結束戰爭的方案有幾種，每種方案對烏克蘭與俄羅斯都有不同的優缺點。

1.首先是談判和解決爭端。美國和其他西方國家斡旋，促使烏克蘭和俄羅斯達成停火協議，並就爭端問題進行談判，包括領土問題、停火監督機制和戰後重建計劃。這對烏克蘭來說，可以結束戰爭，減少平民傷亡和經濟損失，並獲得國際社會的支持和援助來重建國家。然而，烏克蘭可能需在領土問題上做出妥協，喪失部分主權，談判結果也可能不滿足國內民族主義者的期望。對俄羅斯而言，這將解除制裁壓力，恢復經濟和國際地位，並能維持部分戰略目標，穩定國內局勢。然而，俄羅斯需要承擔戰後重建和賠償費用，國內強硬派可能對妥協不滿。國際社會可能採克里米亞模式，不承認被俄羅斯奪走的烏東領土。

2.其次是擱置爭議進行烏東地區的分區自治或聯邦制。在國際社會的支持下，烏克蘭實行分區自治或聯邦制，賦予爭議地區更多的自治權，同時保持國家統一。這對烏克蘭來說，可以保持國家統一，減少分裂風險，增強內部穩定，吸引國際援助。但自治區可能影響中央政府的統治權威，與自治區之間可能出現更多的權力分配問題。對俄羅斯來說，這將增強對自治區的影響力，達成部分戰略目標，提升國內和國際形象，展示和平解決能力。然而，俄羅斯需要持續提供支持和援助，影響經濟負擔，國內強硬派可能對妥協不滿。

3.另一個方案是國際維和部隊介入。在聯合國或其他國際組織的授權下，派遣國際維和部隊進駐衝突地區，監督停火協議的執行，並保障當地平民的安全。對烏克蘭來說，這將減少軍事衝突，保障平民安全，獲得國際社會的支持和重建援助，但可能在主權問題上受限，影響國家獨立性，需要承擔部分維和費用和後續管理問題。對俄羅斯來說，這將解除部分制裁壓力，恢復國際關係，展示和平解決衝突的意願，提升國際形象，但需要與國際維和部隊合作，可能影響戰略部署，國內強硬派可能對維和部隊介入不滿，導致俄羅斯選擇持續開戰。

4.如果俄羅斯不願意配合美國協調，最終難避免軍事解決，美國將提供烏克蘭更多精準高端武器，甚至是多架戰鬥機進行攻擊。最終目的是迫使俄羅斯撤軍或達成條件苛刻的和平協議。

對烏克蘭來說，如果在戰爭中獲勝，能維護國家主權和領土完整，增強國家凝聚力和國際地位。但要獨自面臨巨大的人力物力損失和經濟負擔，因為即使俄羅斯戰敗也不會支付烏克蘭賠款，西方國家只能強行扣押俄羅斯海外資產執行賠償。若烏克蘭失敗，可能喪失更多領土和主權，克里米亞更不可能拿回，未來很難避免整個被併吞的命運。對俄羅斯來說，如果獲勝，能達成戰略目標，鞏固國際地位，增強國內政權的合法性和支持度。但面臨國際社會更嚴厲的制裁和孤立，若失敗，可能導致內部動盪和政權危機。以上這些處理方式各有優缺點，未來的發展將取決於雙方的談判意願和國際社會的介入程度。

The results of the 2024 U.S. presidential election are set to be revealed in November, and it is highly likely that Trump will be re-elected. Recently, he announced that if he is elected, he plans to address the war between Ukraine and Russia before his inauguration, hoping to force both parties to the negotiation table. He emphasized that the United States needs to focus on dealing with China and does not want to provide endless financial aid and weapons to Ukraine. Experts predict that there are several potential solutions to end the war, each with different advantages and disadvantages for Ukraine and Russia.

Firstly, negotiation and dispute resolution could be pursued. The United States and other Western countries would mediate to help Ukraine and Russia reach a ceasefire agreement and negotiate on dispute issues, including territorial issues, ceasefire monitoring mechanisms, and post-war reconstruction plans. For Ukraine, this could end the war, reduce civilian casualties and economic losses, and gain international support and aid for rebuilding the country. However, Ukraine may need to make compromises on territorial issues, losing part of its sovereignty, and the negotiation results might not satisfy nationalists. For Russia, this would ease sanction pressures, restore the economy and international status, and maintain some strategic goals, stabilizing domestic situations. However, Russia would need to bear post-war reconstruction and compensation costs, and hardliners at home might be dissatisfied with the compromises. The international community might adopt the Crimea model, not recognizing the territories in eastern Ukraine taken by Russia.

Secondly, implementing regional autonomy or a federal system in eastern Ukraine, supported by the international community, could be an option. This would grant more autonomy to disputed regions while maintaining national unity. For Ukraine, this would preserve national unity, reduce the risk of fragmentation, enhance internal stability, and attract international aid. However, autonomous regions might affect the central government's authority, and more power distribution issues could arise between the central government and autonomous regions. For Russia, this would increase its influence over the autonomous regions, achieve some strategic goals, improve domestic and international image, and demonstrate the ability to solve conflicts peacefully. However, Russia would need to provide continuous support and aid, affecting its economic burden, and domestic hardliners might be dissatisfied with the compromise.

Another solution could involve the intervention of international peacekeeping forces. Authorized by the United Nations or other international organizations, international peacekeeping forces would be deployed to conflict areas to monitor the implementation of ceasefire agreements and ensure the safety of local civilians. For Ukraine, this would reduce military conflicts, ensure civilian safety, and receive international support and reconstruction aid, but it might limit sovereignty issues, affect national independence, and require bearing part of the peacekeeping costs and subsequent management issues. For Russia, this would ease some sanction pressures, restore international relations, demonstrate a willingness to resolve conflicts peacefully, and enhance its international image. However, cooperation with international peacekeeping forces might affect strategic deployments, and domestic hardliners might be dissatisfied with the intervention, leading Russia to choose continued warfare.

If Russia is unwilling to cooperate with U.S. mediation, military resolution might ultimately be unavoidable. The United States would provide Ukraine with more precise high-end weapons and even multiple fighter jets for attacks. The ultimate goal is to force Russia to withdraw its troops or reach a peace agreement with harsh conditions. For Ukraine, if victorious, it could preserve national sovereignty and territorial integrity, strengthen national cohesion, and enhance international status. However, Ukraine would face enormous human and material losses and economic burdens alone, as Russia would not pay reparations even if defeated, and Western countries could only forcibly seize Russian overseas assets for compensation. If Ukraine fails, it might lose more territories and sovereignty, making it impossible to reclaim Crimea and facing the fate of complete annexation. For Russia, if victorious, it could achieve strategic goals, consolidate international status, and enhance the legitimacy and support of the domestic regime. However, it would face harsher sanctions and isolation from the international community, and if defeated, it could lead to internal turmoil and regime crisis.

These various approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. The future development will depend on the willingness of both parties to negotiate and the degree of intervention from the international community.

照片:DALLE3