Analysis of: Ukraine war briefing: 10% away from peace, Zelenskyy tells Ukrainians
The Guardian | January 1, 2026
The Ukraine conflict's potential resolution reveals the complex interplay of inter-imperialist competition, resource control, and the subordination of working-class interests to capital accumulation. Zelenskyy's assertion that peace is '90% ready' while rejecting terms that would cede the Donbas exposes the fundamental contradiction: peace negotiations occur not on humanitarian grounds but within frameworks determined by competing capitalist blocs seeking strategic advantage. The Ukrainian working class, subjected to drone attacks on civilian infrastructure and energy systems, bears the material costs while European and American ruling classes coordinate 'security guarantees' that ultimately serve to integrate Ukraine into Western capital's sphere of influence. The material stakes are explicit throughout: control of the Donbas region (rich in coal, iron, and industrial capacity), Serbian oil refineries majority-owned by Russian capital, and energy infrastructure systematically targeted by both sides. The US sanctions on NIS demonstrate how energy resources serve as instruments of inter-imperialist leverage, with Serbian workers' fuel access becoming collateral in great-power competition. North Korea's deployment of troops—ordered to die rather than surrender—reveals how peripheral states sacrifice their working populations to maintain alliance relationships with dominant powers. The information warfare surrounding the alleged drone attack on Putin's residence illustrates how both sides manufacture narratives to justify continued military spending and territorial claims. EU diplomat Kallas's dismissal of Russian claims as 'deliberate distraction' is accurate, yet obscures how all parties engage in similar propaganda operations. The underlying reality remains: workers in Ukraine, Russia, and allied nations experience the war's consequences while ruling classes negotiate territorial and resource divisions that will determine future exploitation patterns.
Class Dynamics
Actors: Ukrainian state apparatus (Zelenskyy administration), Russian oligarchic-state complex (Putin regime), European ruling class coalition (Macron, EU leadership), US imperial state apparatus (Trump administration, CIA), Ukrainian working class and civilians, Russian working class and conscripts, North Korean military laborers, Serbian workers dependent on oil industry, Energy capital (DTEK, NIS, oil industry owners)
Beneficiaries: Western defense industries receiving expanded contracts, Energy corporations benefiting from supply disruptions, US capital gaining European market access, Political elites consolidating wartime authority, Financial institutions managing reconstruction debt
Harmed Parties: Ukrainian civilians (directly attacked, displaced), Russian conscripts (casualty statistics hidden), North Korean troops (expendable military labor), Serbian workers (fuel access weaponized), Working classes across all belligerent nations (bearing costs), Children injured in Odesa attacks
The conflict demonstrates a multi-layered hierarchy: at the apex, US and EU capitals coordinate to expand NATO's economic sphere; Russian oligarchic capital resists this encroachment while pursuing its own imperial expansion; peripheral states (Serbia, North Korea) are compelled into dependency relationships; while working populations across all nations are mobilized, killed, and displaced in service of these competing elite interests. Zelenskyy's position reveals the dependent nature of Ukrainian state power—negotiating 'security guarantees' fundamentally means accepting subordination to one imperial bloc to escape another.
Material Conditions
Economic Factors: Donbas industrial and mineral resources (coal, iron, manufacturing), European energy dependency and transition politics, US sanctions as economic warfare tools, Serbian oil refinery controlling 80% of domestic fuel, Ukrainian energy infrastructure as strategic target, Defense industry profit accumulation, Post-war reconstruction financing and debt
The war fundamentally concerns which capitalist bloc will control the extraction and exploitation of Ukrainian labor and resources. Western integration means privatization favorable to EU/US capital, labor market 'reforms,' and debt-financed reconstruction benefiting international finance. Russian control means extraction for oligarchic accumulation. Neither outcome represents working-class liberation. The NIS sanctions demonstrate how production facilities become leverage points—workers' livelihoods suspended while ownership transfers between capitalist factions are negotiated.
Resources at Stake: Donbas coal and iron ore deposits, Ukrainian agricultural land (among world's most fertile), Industrial manufacturing capacity, Energy transit infrastructure (pipelines), Serbian petroleum refinery and distribution, Black Sea port access (Odesa), Rare earth minerals, Labor power of Ukrainian workforce
Historical Context
Precedents: Post-WWI territorial settlements creating future conflicts, Cold War proxy conflicts subordinating local populations, Yugoslav dissolution and Western intervention, 2008 financial crisis intensifying resource competition, 2014 Maidan and initial Donbas conflict, Historical great-power competition over Eastern European territories
This conflict represents the latest phase of post-Soviet capitalist restoration's contradictions. The 1990s 'shock therapy' created both Russian oligarchic capital and Ukrainian comprador classes seeking Western integration. Inter-imperialist competition—dormant during US unipolar hegemony—has intensified as declining American dominance meets resurgent Russian and Chinese challenges. The pattern of using peripheral nations as battlegrounds while protecting core capitalist centers echoes colonial-era dynamics, now reproduced within Europe itself.
Contradictions
Primary: The fundamental contradiction lies between the stated goal of 'peace' and the actual requirement that any settlement must secure one capitalist bloc's dominance over Ukrainian resources and labor. Zelenskyy cannot accept 'peace at any cost' because his state's legitimacy depends on delivering Western integration—yet this integration itself perpetuates the conditions generating Russian opposition.
Secondary: Western powers demand Russian defeat while avoiding direct confrontation risking nuclear escalation, Ukraine requires massive military aid while being expected to eventually repay through economic subordination, Russia claims to fight NATO expansion while its actions accelerate Finnish/Swedish membership, North Korea sacrifices soldiers for Russian alliance while gaining little material benefit for its population, Serbia maintains EU aspirations while dependent on Russian-owned energy infrastructure, Trump simultaneously amplifies Russian narratives and shares anti-Russia editorials
These contradictions cannot be resolved within the current framework. A negotiated settlement will temporarily freeze rather than resolve underlying tensions, likely creating conditions for future conflict—similar to post-WWI arrangements. The fundamental contradiction between competing imperial blocs' need for expansion will persist regardless of where borders are drawn. Working-class movements in all affected nations would need to develop independent positions opposing both NATO expansion and Russian imperialism to break this cycle, though such movements remain nascent and suppressed under wartime conditions.
Global Interconnections
This conflict crystallizes broader systemic dynamics of late capitalism's crisis tendencies. The post-2008 period has seen intensified competition for diminishing profitable investment opportunities, driving major powers toward territorial and resource conflicts previously mediated through financial mechanisms. Ukraine represents a convergence point for multiple global tensions: US-EU coordination against rising multipolar challenges, energy transition politics creating new resource scrambles, and the militarization of economic competition through sanctions regimes. The NIS sanctions exemplify how even peripheral economies (Serbia) become sites of great-power leverage. The involvement of North Korea—sending troops under suicide orders—reveals how the conflict draws in states across the global system, each seeking advantage or survival within hierarchical power structures. Information warfare, evidenced by the fabricated drone attack narrative and coordinated diplomatic responses, demonstrates how ideological production serves material interests. The systematic targeting of civilian infrastructure (Odesa apartments, power grid) by both sides follows the logic of total war characteristic of inter-imperialist conflicts, where working populations become legitimate targets for economic attrition.
Conclusion
The approaching 'peace deal' will not resolve the fundamental contradictions driving this conflict but will establish new parameters for continued competition. Working classes across all involved nations will bear reconstruction costs through austerity, debt servicing, and continued military spending justified by unresolved tensions. The immediate task for class-conscious analysis is recognizing that neither NATO integration nor Russian dominance serves workers' interests—both represent different configurations of capitalist exploitation. Building international working-class solidarity that transcends the nationalist frameworks promoted by all belligerent states remains essential, though extremely difficult under current conditions. The war's conclusion will likely intensify domestic class conflicts as governments seek to extract reconstruction costs from their populations while capital accumulates through rebuilding contracts—creating potential openings for renewed labor organization if workers can resist nationalist divisions.
Editorial Note: This analysis applies a dialectical materialist framework to news events. It represents one interpretive perspective and should not be considered objective reporting.
AI-Assisted Analysis | Confidence: 92%