Medvedev Map of Ukraine Deemed Unrealistic by Critics

Medvedev Map of Ukraine Deemed Unrealistic by Critics

The circulating map has a simple legend: red marks the Ukrainian territory Russia claims it needs to keep, while blue shows what would remain of the country. It was shared by Dmitry Medvedev, Vice-Chairman of the Federation Council (Russia's Senate), accompanied by an uncompromising statement: "We will not stop until this is the case."

The piece, spread by the Hal Turner Radio Show, is not an official document. It is more of a deduction: the land Russia would need to deploy missile defense systems and prevent Moscow from being within range. Hence the first criticism in the thread: if the front barely moves, why publish a map promising half the country?

What Red Includes and What It Leaves Out

Read alongside the list of oblasts that, according to one participant, Sergei Shoigu declared Russian in March 2022, the map lacks names. That same message notes that Kyiv and Zhytomyr are missing and that Ukraine would be left with an area similar to the USSR's Carpathian Military District. Another participant raises the uncomfortable question: what about Odesa? Without sea access, what survives would not be a viable state.

Some argue the natural border is the Dnieper River, the same line where the last effective defense of the Eastern Front was established in World War II, and that crossing it required the largest land battle in history.

Moscow's Repeated Motive: Five Minutes Flight Time to Moscow

The version aligning with the conflict's origin is the one Russia has repeated since before 2022. NATO wanted to install US missile defenses on Ukrainian soil, five minutes flight time from Moscow and strategic nuclear silos. Russia argues no nation can defend against a missile impacting five minutes after launch. Russia demanded "ironclad, legally binding" security guarantees. The proposal reached the White House and NATO headquarters. The response, according to this narrative, was mockery. Days later came a five-hour ultimatum to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who consulted London and Washington and received orders to ignore it. Two hours after the deadline, troops crossed the border.

Three Years and 18%: The Calculation Questioning the Map

Here the disagreement begins. A calculation circulating in the conflict's own tracking is devastating: three years were needed to secure 18% of Ukraine. Another participant states that in three years, 100 kilometers have not been taken in the east, and at that pace, the red on the map is not a plan but wishful thinking.

The casualty figures worsen the reading. Material accompanying the map speaks of over a million dead soldiers, mostly Ukrainians, but also a considerable Russian contingent. One participant cites the example that taking a town of 30,000 inhabitants would have cost 13,000 lives. Some compare the scenario to World War I, with the front stalled for four years and a sudden collapse at the end.

Why the Front Moves So Slowly

The technical explanation offered has little epic quality and much tonnage. Artillery fires a 60-kilogram projectile containing only 13 kilograms of explosive; aviation drops bombs of 250, 500, and 1,500 kilograms where almost everything is payload. Artillery wears down; aviation breaks the front. According to this explanation, Russia is executing thousands of air missions per month for the first time, and the number keeps growing.

That same explanation adds that electronic warfare dominance allows drones to operate 60 kilometers from the front without interference. The result: HIMARS, Archer, or Krabs systems destroyed 40-60 km from the contact line. In parallel, a data point on human attrition cited aside: of the 250,000 active soldiers Ukraine reportedly has left, 100,000 are women, and only 5,000 are on the front.

Ukraine Also Entered Russia

According to another message in the thread, seven months after this map was drawn, Ukrainian forces crossed the border in the opposite direction. The sarcasm with which the matter is dismissed in the conflict's tracking—the master plan went awry—well summarizes the distance between what is promised on paper and what holds up on the contact line.

The Map Also Marks Gas and Oil

A participant points out that the red covers Ukrainian oil and gas fields. Coincidence or not, the drawing matches what lies underground. Another participant suggests dividing what remains among Hungary, Romania, and Poland, to drive a wedge inside NATO itself.

Where the Analysis Stalls

The map could be a negotiating position, a troll, or a wish list. What it does not resolve is whether Russia has the means to sustain the entire red area, nor whether the West is willing to let Odesa change hands. Between what is painted and what the front allows, the discussion stays exactly there.