Peace in Ukraine - Summary of the debate concerning a possible Trump "reverse Nixon-strategy"3/12/2025 The "reverse Nixon" strategy by some sources represents a potentially significant reorientation of American foreign policy during Trump 2 (he has repeatedly expressed this objective) with far-reaching implications. While there may be a deliberate strategy at work rather than merely erratic decision-making, the approach faces considerable challenges given the fundamental differences between today's geopolitical landscape and that of 1972.
For European allies, particularly those in Eastern Europe, this strategy creates troubling uncertainties. If the United States calculates that cooperation with Russia against China outweighs its traditional NATO commitments, the security architecture that has underpinned European stability for decades could be at risk. This possibility demands careful consideration from European policymakers, who may need to develop more autonomous security capabilities and diplomatic strategies to navigate this shifting landscape. The resumption of US aid to Ukraine alongside ceasefire negotiations demonstrates the complex and sometimes contradictory nature of this approach. They may be seen as part of a multifaceted pressure campaign combining both military and diplomatic elements to achieve broader strategic objectives.
0 Comments
In recent years, particularly as the Russia-Ukraine war enters its fourth year in 2025, several significant studies have emerged examining the complex challenge of securing a sustainable ceasefire in Ukraine. These analyses vary in their approaches but share a common concern: Russia's documented history of violating previous agreements raises serious questions about how to design a ceasefire that can withstand potential large-scale violations.
The most comprehensive recent analysis comes from the Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP), which published a detailed "Swiss army knife of options" for achieving a sustainable ceasefire in Ukraine in February 2025. This 31-page document represents one of the most thorough proposals to date, illustrating how rapidly ceasefire planning has shifted from theoretical discussions to practical considerations[1][7]. It is authored by an eminent OSCE expert, Dr Walter Kemp with oversight by the former OSCE Secretary- General Ambassador Thomas Greminger. But it should be immediately added that this study provides a framework for the analysis of the requirements of a viable cease-fire without proposing solutions to several key problems relating to security guarantees and political agreements. Indeed, a search of the various studies quoted below gives the answer that monitoring missions, regardless of size, cannot prevent a determined Russian offensive without broader security guarantees and international consequences for violations. Conclusion: A Defining Moment for European Unity
European Council President António Costa characterized the summit as "a defining moment for Europe" and for European security[11]. Despite the procedural challenges created by Hungary's veto, the EU demonstrated remarkable solidarity with Ukraine by having 26 nations proceed with substantive commitments. This unprecedented approach highlights both the EU's determination to support Ukraine and the growing internal tensions regarding decision-making processes when facing opposition from individual member states. The summit outcomes reinforce that despite shifting geopolitical dynamics, particularly from the United States, the European Union remains committed to Ukraine's sovereignty and security through both immediate military assistance and long-term security guarantees. # Prospects for Peace in Ukraine: A Comprehensive Analysis of Current Initiatives
As of March 2025, the Russia-Ukraine war has entered its fourth year with renewed diplomatic activity, significant military developments, and evolving peace positions from key stakeholders. The recent efforts by the Trump administration and European nations have introduced new dynamics to peace prospects, though substantial obstacles remain to achieving a sustainable resolution to the conflict. ## Historical Context of Peace Negotiations Peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine have witnessed several iterations since the invasion began in February 2022. The initial talks commenced four days after the start of the war, on February 28, 2022, in Belarus, ending without result[1]. Subsequent rounds followed on March 3 and 7, 2022, on the Belarus-Ukraine border, with fourth and fifth rounds taking place on March 10 and 14, 2022, in Turkey[1]. These negotiations in Turkey produced the Istanbul Communiqué, which proposed Ukraine ending its plans to join NATO and accepting limits on its military, while Western countries would be obliged to help Ukraine in case of aggression[1]. The talks nearly reached agreement, with both sides considering "far-reaching concessions," but halted in May 2022 following events such as the Bucha massacre[1]. This pattern of promising talks followed by collapse has characterized much of the peace process over the past three years. The fundamental positions of both countries have remained relatively stable since 2022, with Ukraine consistently demanding the restoration of its territorial integrity and Russia insisting on territorial concessions and Ukrainian neutrality. In November 2022, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy proposed a 10-point peace plan that called for a ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces, restoration of pre-2014 borders, release of prisoners, nuclear safety, and security guarantees for Ukraine[1]. This comprehensive plan has served as the foundation for Ukraine's approach to peace negotiations, though with some pragmatic evolutions over time as the military situation has evolved. Russian initiatives have also occurred throughout the conflict, though many have been questioned by Western observers. Deputy Kremlin Chief of Staff Dmitry Kozak claimed in 2022 that he had negotiated an agreement with Ukraine within days of the invasion that would have ended hostilities in exchange for guarantees that Ukraine would not join NATO[1]. This settlement was allegedly blocked by Putin, who "expanded his objectives to include annexing swathes of Ukrainian territory," though Kremlin spokespeople denied this account[1]. These contradictory narratives highlight the challenge of achieving diplomatic breakthroughs when trust between parties is fundamentally broken. ## Current Peace Positions of Key Stakeholders As of early 2025, the positions of Ukraine and Russia remain fundamentally at odds on key issues. Ukraine's peace terms require Russia to withdraw its troops, its leaders to be prosecuted for war crimes, and Ukraine to receive robust security guarantees[1]. Ukraine has consistently maintained that it will not cede sovereignty over territories currently occupied by Russia, though the pragmatic implementation of this position has evolved somewhat over time. Russia's terms present a stark contrast, demanding that Russia be allowed to keep all land it currently occupies, be given all provinces it claims but does not fully control, and that Ukraine permanently abandon plans to join NATO[1]. In June 2024, Putin outlined Russia's ceasefire terms in a speech that insisted Ukraine hand over the provinces of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts, including parts Russia does not control[1]. He further demanded that Ukraine become a neutral country and never seek to develop nuclear weapons, while emphasizing that the rights of Russian-speakers must be respected and sanctions against Russia must be lifted[1]. Putin characterized this proposal as "not about freezing the conflict but about its final resolution," though President Zelenskyy dismissed these demands as ultimatums, comparing them to Hitler's territorial demands in Czechoslovakia[1]. The Trump administration has introduced a new dynamic to these positions since taking office in January 2025. While not formally outlining its own peace proposal, the administration has pursued direct talks with Russia and pressured Ukraine to engage in negotiations. The emerging US position appears to favor a more pragmatic approach that might accept some of Russia's territorial gains while seeking security guarantees for Ukraine outside of NATO membership. This represents a significant shift from the previous administration's approach, which had more firmly backed Ukraine's territorial integrity. ## Recent Diplomatic Initiatives February 2025 marked a significant turning point in peace efforts with the direct involvement of US President Donald Trump. On February 12, 2025, Trump announced that negotiations to end the Ukraine war would "start immediately" following a telephone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin[1]. This initiative coincided with a major shift in the American position at a Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting at NATO headquarters, where the new US Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, stated that "returning to" Ukraine's internationally recognized borders was "an unrealistic objective" and attempting to regain all territory "will only prolong the war and cause more suffering"[1]. The first round of US-Russia peace talks took place in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on February 18, with a second round announced for February 25[2]. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio reported that the parties had broadly agreed to pursue three goals: restoring embassy staffing in Washington and Moscow, creating a high-level team to support Ukraine peace talks, and exploring closer relations and economic cooperation[2]. Notably, no Ukrainian officials attended these talks, prompting President Zelenskyy to state that Ukraine would not accept any outcome since Kyiv didn't participate[2]. European allies have similarly expressed dismay at being sidelined in these negotiations[2]. In response to the US-Russia bilateral talks, European leaders have launched their own peace initiative. In early March 2025, the UK announced it would work with Europe to devise a Ukraine peace deal to present to Trump[5]. This approach includes discussions of a possible "coalition of the willing" that might provide security guarantees to Ukraine outside of formal NATO structures[5]. French President Emmanuel Macron has suggested advocating for a month-long ceasefire that would suspend sea and air assaults and attacks on energy infrastructure, with both France and the UK indicating openness to sending peacekeeping forces to Ukraine as part of a ceasefire agreement[5]. Despite these complex diplomatic currents, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha expressed cautious optimism on February 23, stating that President Zelenskyy aims to end the war and reach a just peace in 2025[3]. "We are convinced that this year offers a real opportunity for peace," Sybiha said, adding that Ukraine's diplomatic service is fully mobilized to achieve this goal[3]. This statement suggests that despite public resistance to unfavorable terms, Ukraine may be preparing its population for difficult compromises ahead. ## The Impact of US Aid Suspension on Peace Prospects A pivotal development affecting peace prospects occurred on March 3, 2025, when President Trump ordered a pause on US military aid to Ukraine, suspending the delivery of critical warfighting materiel[7]. An anonymous White House official stated that the United States is "pausing and reviewing" military aid until Trump "determines that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is making a good-faith effort towards peace negotiations with Russia"[7]. This move places significant pressure on Ukraine to engage in negotiations on terms it might previously have rejected. The United States had been providing Ukraine with artillery ammunition, armored vehicles, towed howitzers, Patriot air defense batteries, and long-range rocket and missile systems—many of which are sophisticated systems that only the United States can supply[7]. A Ukrainian official warned that Ukraine may run out of US-provided artillery shells by May or June 2025, but cautioned that Patriot air defense missiles could run out "in a matter of weeks"[7]. The shortage of Patriot missiles would have severe impacts on the safety of Ukraine's critical infrastructure and civilian populations, as Ukraine's other supporters lack analogous systems that can protect against Russian missile strikes, particularly ballistic missiles[7]. In response to the aid suspension, the Ukrainian Parliament and President Zelenskyy reiterated their commitment to work with the Trump Administration to achieve a sustainable and lasting peace[7]. This conciliatory tone suggests recognition of Ukraine's dependence on US support and willingness to engage more seriously with the peace process, despite reservations about potential terms. The Kremlin has expressed cautious optimism about the pausing of US military aid to Ukraine, with Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov welcoming the move and noting that Russia can hope "without indulging in excessive optimism" that the aid suspension will "incline" the Ukrainian government towards peace[7]. However, Putin has not made any ceasefire offers since Trump assumed office, and Kremlin officials formally rejected the possibility of a ceasefire on any terms other than Ukraine's and the West's complete capitulation in late February 2025[7]. This suggests that Russia may be seeking to take advantage of Ukraine's weakened position rather than engaging in genuine compromise. ## The Economic Dimension: Minerals Deal and Recovery Efforts An important economic dimension of the emerging peace framework involves negotiations over Ukraine's natural resources. After weeks of intense negotiations, Kyiv and Washington agreed in February 2025 on a framework for a broad economic deal that would include access to Ukraine's rare earth minerals[9]. According to Yuliia Pavytska, Manager of the Sanctions Programme at the Kyiv School of Economics, the initial draft proposal was perceived as unfavorable to Ukrainian interests, being characterized as a "barbaric deal that just forces Ukraine to give away its resources"[9]. However, Kyiv made "tremendous progress" in amending the agreement to better "serve Ukraine interests" and provide more "balance"[9]. This economic arrangement may form part of a broader peace framework, potentially offering Ukraine financial incentives and investment that could support post-war recovery. The Ukraine Recovery Conference scheduled for July 10-11, 2025, in Rome will focus on the "swift recovery and long-term reconstruction of Ukraine"[6]. This conference represents the fourth in a series of high-level political events dedicated to Ukraine's recovery since the beginning of Russia's full-scale war of aggression[6]. Such international support mechanisms could provide economic incentives for Ukraine to consider peace terms that might otherwise be difficult to accept. The economic realities facing both countries continue to influence their approaches to peace. Russia's larger population (145 million vs. 38 million) and economy ($2,021 billion GDP vs. $179 billion GDP) give it advantages in a protracted conflict[10]. However, Western sanctions continue to affect the Russian economy, and the high casualties of the conflict—over 420,000 in 2024 alone, with total combat losses since 2022 approaching 1 million troops—place significant strain on Russian society[10]. This economic and human toll may increase Russia's interest in a settlement, though Putin has shown willingness to accept high costs to achieve his objectives. ## Ukrainian Society and Resilience Factors Despite the immense toll of Russia's war and growing US pressure to negotiate a deal, Ukrainian resolve remains remarkably strong. As of February 2025, trust in President Zelenskyy increased by several percentage points since December 2024, reaching 57-65 percent according to different polls[12]. This demonstrates how Ukrainians continue to "rally around the flag" three years into the full-scale Russian invasion, a factor that cannot be ignored in peace calculations[12]. The resilience of Ukrainian society stems from several factors that have developed since 2014. A strong sense of civic duty and active citizenship has emerged, with civil society organizations playing crucial roles in responding to wartime challenges. The decentralization reform launched in 2015-2020 has empowered local actors, enabling communities liberated in 2022 to recover quickly by engaging residents, businesses, and foreign donors[12]. Perhaps most significantly, a majority of Ukrainians perceive Russia as an existential threat following the occupation of Crimea and Donbas, the attempts to capture Kharkiv and Odesa in 2014, and the full-scale invasion in 2022[12]. This perception has forged a stronger national identity that sustains resistance even under extreme pressure. Despite massive war-related stress and differing views on negotiations, 71 percent of Ukrainians remain optimistic about their country's future, and 69 percent continue to believe in Ukraine's ability to repel Russian attacks[12]. The armed forces remain the most trusted national institution, serving as a central source of hope and optimism[12]. This societal resilience suggests that Ukrainians may resist a peace agreement perceived as rewarding Russian aggression or compromising Ukrainian sovereignty, creating potential domestic political challenges for Zelenskyy if he accepts unfavorable terms under US pressure. ## The Diplomatic Balancing Act at the United Nations The shifting positions on Ukraine have been dramatically illustrated in recent United Nations proceedings. On February 24, 2025, marking the third anniversary of Russia's invasion, the Security Council adopted resolution 2774, a short US-authored text calling for a swift end to the Russia-Ukraine war and urging a lasting peace between the countries[11]. This marked the first substantive resolution on Ukraine passed by the Council since the war began, but also highlighted major fractures among traditional Western allies. Earlier that day, the General Assembly voted on competing resolutions—one authored by European Union member states and another by the US—after the US unexpectedly introduced its own text that omitted references to Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity[11]. This move rattled European diplomats, particularly as Washington had been engaging in negotiations without expressing obvious concerns with the Ukrainian-EU text[11]. Breaking from transatlantic unity, the US pressed Ukraine to withdraw its draft resolution in favor of its own and urged member states to withhold support, even threatening to vote against the Ukrainian-EU resolution[11]. The General Assembly vote revealed deep divisions, with the Ukrainian-EU resolution securing 93 votes—48 fewer than a similar 2023 resolution[11]. The US voted against it alongside Russia and 16 other countries, while 65 members abstained[11]. This diplomatic rift exposed growing divisions in the Western alliance regarding approaches to ending the conflict, with the US favoring a pragmatic forward-looking approach while European allies insisted that any settlement must be rooted in international law to avoid legitimizing aggression[11]. ## Military Realities Shaping Peace Prospects The current military situation significantly influences peace prospects. As of early 2025, Russian forces have been conducting highly attritional, infantry-led assaults along the frontline that result in high losses but only return disproportionately limited territorial gains[7]. Putin appears committed to gradual, creeping gains at the expense of high losses, likely believing that these limited advances can set conditions over time for Russia to demand more Ukrainian territory during future peace negotiations[7]. Russian forces have made recent advances near Lyman, Pokrovsk, and in western Zaporizhia Oblast, while Ukrainian forces have made limited advances near Pokrovsk[7]. Russia is also conducting nightly drone and missile strikes against rear Ukrainian areas, killing civilians and destroying Ukrainian civilian and energy infrastructure[7]. These attacks increase pressure on Ukraine's population and leadership to consider peace terms, while also hardening anti-Russian sentiment that makes acceptance of territorial concessions more difficult politically. The Russian Ministry of Defense is reportedly developing a plan to partially demobilize a limited number of mobilized personnel no earlier than July 2025, likely to address growing societal backlash over the lack of rotations and demobilization of Russian troops for over two years[7]. However, the Kremlin is reportedly worried that even partial demobilization may result in regime instability, as it is unprepared to reintegrate thousands of battle-hardened veterans[7]. This internal Russian dynamic may influence Putin's calculations regarding a peace settlement, potentially making him more amenable to a ceasefire that allows him to declare victory and begin demobilization. ## Conclusion: Assessing Peace Prospects The prospects for peace in Ukraine as of March 2025 present a complex and evolving picture. The entry of the Trump administration as an active mediator has created new diplomatic momentum but also introduced tensions between Ukraine and its Western supporters. The fundamental positions of Ukraine and Russia remain far apart, with Ukraine insisting on territorial integrity and sovereignty while Russia demands recognition of its territorial conquests and Ukrainian neutrality. The suspension of US military aid has increased pressure on Ukraine to consider compromise positions, creating leverage that may accelerate negotiations but also potentially weakening Ukraine's position at the bargaining table. European efforts to develop an alternative peace framework through a "coalition of the willing" demonstrate both concern about the US approach and commitment to supporting Ukraine's security needs. Ukrainian society's remarkable resilience remains a critical factor that may constrain Zelenskyy's ability to accept terms perceived as capitulation, even under intense external pressure. At the same time, the growing military challenges facing Ukraine without consistent US support may force difficult pragmatic calculations about what peace terms are achievable. In the short term, a comprehensive peace agreement that fully satisfies all parties appears unlikely. A ceasefire or partial agreement addressing some issues while deferring others might be more achievable, potentially allowing for immediate humanitarian relief while creating space for longer-term diplomatic solutions. The intense diplomatic activity of early 2025 suggests that significant developments may emerge in the coming months, potentially altering the trajectory of this devastating conflict that has already caused immense human suffering and reshaped European security architecture. Whether these efforts will yield sustainable peace or merely a temporary pause in hostilities remains uncertain, but the current diplomatic momentum represents the most significant opportunity for conflict resolution since the war began three years ago. Sources [1] Peace negotiations in the Russian invasion of Ukraine - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_negotiations_in_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine [2] Trump announces new round of Ukraine peace talks with Russia https://www.euronews.com/2025/02/22/donald-trump-announces-second-round-of-ukraine-peace-talks-with-russian-diplomats [3] Zelenskyy aims for just peace, war's end in 2025: Ukrainian foreign ... https://www.aa.com.tr/en/russia-ukraine-war/zelenskyy-aims-for-just-peace-war-s-end-in-2025-ukrainian-foreign-minister/3490763 [4] Four scenarios for securing peace in Ukraine - VOA https://www.voanews.com/a/four-scenarios-for-securing-peace-in-ukraine/7983483.html [5] Russia-Ukraine war: What's a 'coalition of the willing', Europe's new ... https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/3/russia-ukraine-war-whats-a-coalition-of-the-willing-europes-new-plan [6] Ukraine recovery Conference 2025 | Rome | 10-11 July https://www.urc-international.com [7] Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 4, 2025 https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-4-2025 [8] Ukraine: Briefing and Vote on a Draft Resolution* : What's In Blue https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2025/02/ukraine-briefing-and-vote-on-a-draft-resolution.php [9] Ukraine-US minerals deal the first diplomatic balancing act for Kyiv https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/02/28/ukraine-us-minerals-deal-the-first-diplomatic-balancing-act-for-kyiv [10] Is Ukraine Now Doomed? https://www.csis.org/analysis/ukraine-now-doomed [11] In Hindsight: The US Pivot on Ukraine and Shifting Security Council ... https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/monthly-forecast/2025-03/in-hindsight-the-us-pivot-on-ukraine-and-shifting-security-council-dynamics.php [12] How Ukraine Remains Resilient, Three Years On https://carnegieendowment.org/europe/strategic-europe/2025/02/how-ukraine-remains-resilient-three-years-on?lang=en [13] Zelenskiy pledges to 'make things right' with US as minerals deal remains uncertain https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/trump-halts-all-us-military-aid-ukraine-white-house-official-says-2025-03-04/ [14] Starmer says ‘coalition of the willing’ to present Ukraine peace plan to US https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/2/european-leaders-gather-in-london-to-strengthen-support-for-ukraine [15] Who Will Join Europe's 'Coalition of the Willing' to Help Ukraine? https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/03/world/europe/europe-ukraine-russia.html [16] Zelensky offers partial ceasefire with Russia to restart peace talks https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/03/04/trump-ukraine-aid-pause-reaction/ [17] Russia's War in Ukraine and the Prospects for Peace - CSIS https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-war-ukraine-and-prospects-peace [18] Ukraine updates: Zelenskyy says peace talks will include US https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-updates-zelenskyy-says-peace-talks-will-include-us/live-71806397 [19] What are the prospects for Ukraine? - Harvard Gazette https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2025/02/what-are-the-prospects-for-ukraine/ [20] Zelensky describes Oval Office meeting as ‘regrettable,’ says he is ready to negotiate peace https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/04/europe/zelensky-trump-argument-comment-ukraine-intl/index.html [21] War or Peace in Ukraine: US Moves and European Choices https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/survival-online/2025/02/war-or-peace-in-ukraine-us-moves-and-european-choices/ [22] What are the prospects for peace in Ukraine 3 years after Russia ... https://www.npr.org/2025/02/24/nx-s1-5305016/what-are-the-prospects-for-peace-in-ukraine-3-years-after-russia-launched-its-war [23] Ukraine: Zelenskyy ready to work with Trump toward peace - DW https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-zelenskyy-ready-to-work-with-trump-toward-peace/live-71818042 [24] Zelenskiy says Ukraine needs US support for diplomacy to end war ... https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/zelenskiy-says-ukraine-needs-substantive-diplomacy-end-war-hopes-rely-us-2025-03-03/ [25] With 10 Votes in Favour, 5 Abstentions, Security Council Adopts ... https://press.un.org/en/2025/sc16005.doc.htm [26] Europe's diplomatic flurry over Ukraine continues but prospect for ... https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/02/28/europes-diplomatic-flurry-over-ukraine-continues-but-prospect-for-quick-breakthrough-low [27] US signals Ukraine minerals deal possible as Europe floats peace ... https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/france-britain-propose-partial-one-month-ukraine-truce-macron-tells-le-figaro-2025-03-02/ [28] Trump slams Zelenskyy for saying end of Ukraine war could be 'far ... https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/3/uk-says-several-ukraine-truce-options-on-table-after-france-floats-plan [29] UK, European leaders join forces to draft Ukraine peace plan to take ... https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/uks-starmer-tries-revive-hope-ukraine-peace-summit-2025-03-01/ [30] Europe inches towards Ukraine peace plan, but only baby steps away from US https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/europe-inches-towards-ukraine-peace-plan-but-only-baby-steps-away-from-us/ |
Compilation of sourcesThis compilation is partly done using AI language models seeking to factcheck as much as possible and including sources. Reservation for possible errors. ArchivesCategories |
RSS Feed