Kiriakou’s Ukraine settlement prediction is the forecast John Kiriakou gave in June 2025, prefaced with the disclaimer that it was neither bold nor creative.
The asymmetry it rests on
His premise is manpower rather than territory. The Russians have “a virtually unlimited supply of ground troops that they can just throw into the meat grinder” — and not only Russians. He notes huge Russian losses, which he attributes to Russian military strategy, and adds North Koreans, Belarusians, and “some reports indicating Chinese who have volunteered to go to Russia or go to the front lines and fight on behalf of Russia.”[1]
“Ukraine is a much smaller country. They can’t keep this up forever. The Russians can keep it up forever. And Russia is a nuclear power.”[1][2]
The forecast
“What we’re going to see in the end is that the Russians keep the disputed territories — the Donbas, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson — they’re going to keep Crimea. Ukraine will never ever be a member of NATO. They’ll likely join the European Union eventually, maybe even on a fast track. But I think that the Russians are going to get 90% of what they want.”[2]
The one concession
“The one thing they might not get is probably the least important, and that’s what the Russians are calling denazification of the Ukrainian regime.” Kiriakou notes the Ukrainian position — that there are no Nazis, or “a handful of neo-Nazis, but not in any positions of power” — and reads the Russian demand as instrumental: “I think the Russians repeat that for propaganda purposes. I think they’ll probably be willing to negotiate it.”[3]
Restated in June 2025
Asked during the Istanbul talks what a settlement would look like, Kiriakou gave the same forecast he has given elsewhere and added its cost to the other side. “In the end the Russians are going to get everything that they’re demanding. They’re going to get the Donbas, they’re going to get Crimea — they’re going to have to be recognised, at least de facto — they’re going to get an assurance that Ukraine will never be a member of NATO.”[4]
The single concession he can identify is one Russia was never contesting: acquiescence in Ukrainian membership of the European Union. He regards that as a poor bargain for the EU, which acquires “an economic basket case” and “one of the most corrupt countries in the world” that “they’re going to have to subsidise probably for the next two decades” — with an obligation to take the refugees as well.[5][6]
His evidence that the population movement is already settled is Iceland, which he visits on business every month or so. He has encountered “more Ukrainians in Iceland than any other nationality — almost as many Ukrainians as Icelanders.” They work in every hotel, restaurant and bar, and drive the cabs. “And none of them have any plans to go back. They like it just the way things are.”[6][7]