1. Battlefield developments in 2024
Russia did consolidate and modestly expand its holdings in eastern Ukraine in 2024: it captured Avdiivka in February (its largest single advance since Bakhmut) and then several nearby settlements to the west, plus additional gains around Ocheretyne, Krasnohorivka, and on the northern Kharkiv front, which some analysts called Russia’s biggest territorial gains in about 18 months. (en.wikipedia.org)
This part of the prediction ("consolidating gains" and "potentially making new gains") is broadly consistent with what happened, though the advances were incremental and very costly.

2. The ‘stalemate’ narrative and perception of who is winning
Through 2024 the war was widely described as a positional war of attrition, but a growing body of analysis argued that the balance of advantage had shifted toward Russia: for example, a January 2024 ECFR analysis said the war of attrition "for the time being … implies a Russian victory" unless Western support were significantly increased, and other commentators explicitly described Russia as “winning” or having the upper hand. (eurasiareview.com)
At the same time, many officials and analysts—including Ukraine’s own commander-in-chief in late 2023—continued to use "stalemate" or "positional stalemate" language, framing Russia’s gains as limited and extremely costly rather than a clear, decisive win. (marshallcenter.org)
So the idea that the simple “stalemate” story would be challenged and that Russia would be increasingly seen as having the initiative is partially borne out, but it is not an uncontested consensus.

3. Western support and whether ‘Project Ukraine’ fell apart in 2024
This is where the prediction diverges most clearly from reality. Instead of Western support “significantly unraveling” and “Project Ukraine” falling apart in 2024, the opposite structural trend occurred:

• The EU overcame Hungary’s veto and approved a four‑year €50 billion Ukraine Facility in February 2024. (theguardian.com)
• The U.S. enacted Public Law 118‑50 in April 2024, a large supplemental appropriations bill that included tens of billions of dollars in additional Ukraine assistance. (en.wikipedia.org)
• NATO in April 2024 began planning a €100 billion, five‑year framework for long‑term military support to Ukraine. (reuters.com)
• At the July 2024 Washington NATO summit, allies issued a declaration pledging sustained support, created a dedicated NATO command (NSATU) to coordinate security assistance, and 23 countries signed the Ukraine Compact, explicitly stating they intend to support Ukraine “until it prevails.” (en.wikipedia.org)
• G7 countries in 2024 also agreed on a $50 billion loan package to Ukraine backed by earnings on frozen Russian assets, to be disbursed from late 2024 onward. (reuters.com)
• By December 2024, total Western commitments to Ukraine had increased, with EU and U.S. contributions each exceeding €100 billion, and aid continuing into 2025. (en.wikipedia.org)

There were political disputes and delays (especially in the U.S. Congress and within some EU states), but these did not amount to Western support "significantly unraveling" or the broader aid effort collapsing in 2024; instead, support was institutionalized and extended over a multi‑year horizon.

Overall assessment
The prediction mixed several claims. The limited, attritional Russian advances in 2024 line up reasonably well with the “consolidating gains, potentially making new gains” portion, and there was increasing expert commentary that the war of attrition was trending in Russia’s favor, challenging simplistic “stalemate” language. But the strongest and clearest part of the forecast—that Western support for Ukraine would significantly unravel in 2024 and that “Project Ukraine” would fall apart—did not occur. Western governments instead locked in large, long‑term aid frameworks and publicly recommitted to Ukraine’s war effort.

Because that core claim about the political and strategic trajectory of Western support was decisively wrong, the overall prediction is best judged as wrong, despite containing some partially accurate elements about battlefield trends and perceptions.