1,000 days on, where is Ukraine crisis headed?

Russian forces launched the Oreshnik (meaning hazel tree in Russian) medium-range hyper sonic missiles at Ukraine on Nov 21 in response to Ukraine firing US-made Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) at Russian targets. While the missile did not carry a nuclear warhead, its sheer power was enough to shock the world and raise global concerns about whether the Russia-Ukraine conflict is escalating even after 1,000 days.

But there has been a noticeable shift in the attitudes of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky toward ending the conflict after Donald Trump's victory in the US presidential election. Putin is perhaps waiting for the new US administration to take office, for he thinks it might create an opportunity for cease-fire talks. As such, Russia has pursued a more methodical approach to peace talks, choosing not to rush into hasty actions or decisions.

Zelensky, on the other hand, seems frustrated. He is aware that Trump will likely seek to end the conflict or push Ukraine back to the negotiating table. More important, Trump could even halt additional economic and military aid to Ukraine. And without the support of the United States, Ukraine cannot continue fighting.

When Zelensky reached out to Trump in the hope of securing a meeting or a discussion on the phone, the latter, instead of taking the call, asked Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk to deal with him. This made Zelensky aware of the incoming US administration's shifting priorities and diminishing support for Ukraine. Consequently, after the US presidential election, Zelensky shifted his focus toward securing support from US President Joe Biden and European leaders.

The final two months of the Biden administration have emerged as a delicate variable as far as the Russia-Ukraine conflict is concerned. During the transition of power, the Biden administration has displayed an unusually high level of activity vis-à-vis Ukraine.

Initially, Biden pledged full support for Ukraine, vowing to send every possible dollar as aid to the country but without authorizing Zelensky to use US-made strategic weapons against Russia. But recently, he gave the green light to Zelensky to use the US-made ATACMS to strike deep into Russian territory. The intent behind such decisions is to increase the pressure on Russia before Biden demits office while leaving Trump in a situation where he possibly could not halt supplies to Ukraine. Encouraged by Biden's decision, Zelensky even sought Tomahawk missiles from the US.

Although the steps taken by Biden in the final months of his presidency — providing Ukraine with the weaponry it had been seeking for two years — are unlikely to have a significant impact on the conflict, they still show his avowed support for Ukraine. But his decisions have angered Moscow further.

In direct response to Biden's decisions, Russia changed its nuclear policy, lowering the threshold for nuclear strikes to counter even concerted conventional attacks. The policy holds that any attack launched by a non-nuclear state with the help of a nuclear power will be regarded as a joint attack.

Although Russia initially maintained a degree of restraint on the nuclear issue, the first use of the US-made ATACMS by Ukraine marked a new stage in the conflict. In response, Russia began using its formidable Oreshnik missiles against Ukraine.

Putin even declared that the "hazel" missile is not a weapon of mass destruction but a high-precision weapon, stressing that no other country currently possesses such a missile and there is no technology capable of countering or intercepting it. His remark sounded more like a warning.

The shadow of Russian missiles now hangs over Europe. The United Kingdom's Daily Mail published a graphic, saying "hazel" missiles can strike any city in Europe in less than 20 minutes. The new Russian missile can carry multiple nuclear warheads, and if deployed, "targets in London would go up in flames in under 20 minutes while Berlin further east would have less than 15 minutes before impact".

Norwegian weapons expert Fabian Rene Hoffman's interpretation, on the other hand, is quite representative. He said the message sent by Russia is clear:"Look, last night's strike was nonnuclear in payload but, you know, if whatever you do continues, the next strike might be with a nuclear warhead."

To be sure, Zelensky has his own calculations in response to Putin's message. While continuing to draw global attention to Ukraine — emphasizing that the situation is dire and that aid must not stop — Zelensky is also trying to persuade Trump not to "abandon Ukraine".

Germany's Bild newspaper explained Zelensky's intentions thus: Ukraine hopes to secure Trump's support for a peace agreement favorable to Ukraine by offering nearly $100 billion worth of "internal resources", because he believes Trump is more interested in financial matters than geopolitical ones.

Peace talks, it seems, are now on the agenda, with Zelensky's latest statement suggesting peace can be restored next year. Earlier, in an interview with Fox News, Zelensky admitted that Ukraine could not retake Crimea using military means. This means the Russia-Ukraine conflict will likely come to an end during Trump's presidency, and will involve diplomatic mediation and multiple rounds of negotiations. When neither side can be defeated, this is the only viable option.

The final resolution might resemble what US vice-president-elect J.D. Vance hinted at — allowing Russia to retain the Ukrainian territories it has occupied.

The author is an associate researcher at the Institute of American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. The views don't necessarily reflect those of China Daily.