The Russia-Ukraine war is now a pre-eminent battle of war power as much as political chess, where Washington, Brussels, and Moscow decisions are as much up for grabs as battlefield maneuvers. With the war now four years old, a complicated dance of diplomacy, coercion, and alliance do-overs is underway—sometimes as important as the battle itself.
When Donald Trump eventually returned to the White House, he returned in bombastic bravado, vowing to end the war within a day. It was much more complicated than that. Diplomats at the Center for Strategic and International Studies contend that Putin must be addressed with a careful mix of pressure and rewards, not a “deal-making” approach. Trump’s administration has gone beyond the moods of threat of sanctions to a more advanced policy, balancing carrots and sticks in hopes of enticing Russia to negotiations.
The stakes are huge. Russia, stretched to its limits, has maintained high-risk tolerance and ongoing military engagement. Ukraine is reluctant to accept any agreement that would leave it open to future invasion. Years of broken promises and discredited pacts, from Budapest to Minsk, have built deep mistrust on both sides.
The Trump-Putin summit in Alaska surprised Europe. Europeans worried that Ukraine would be left out of the talks and would be forced to cede land. Trump publicly weighed land exchanges as an option, even going so far as to say that both Moscow and Kyiv would have to give up land to end the conflict. The proposal was met with shock in Kyiv and on the continent, with authorities warning that peace cannot be imposed without Ukrainian participation.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been firm: Ukraine will not trade land for peace. The Ukrainian constitution prohibits cession of territory, and Zelenskyy has insisted on security guarantees against future aggression—in the form of something approximating NATO’s Article 5.
Following the Alaska summit, U.S. diplomat Steve Witkoff indicated that Putin, for the first time, left the door slightly open for Ukraine to be offered extended security guarantees in the form of collective defense. But devil’s in the details, and credibility is in short supply.
The European role matters. Politicians have gone out of their way to be heard, traveling to Washington on board Zelenskyy on their train in a show of support for the sovereignty of Ukraine.
French President Emmanuel Macron warned that to seem weak would incite even more war, as EU foreign affairs commissioner Kaja Kallas maintained that any peace treaty must be negotiated with Ukraine and European voices because the security of the continent is at stake. There is worry, however, that the U.S. and Russia might negotiate some deal without regard for European interests.
On the front, the price of the war in human lives grows day by day. Combat continues uninterrupted, above all, near Donetsk and on contested battlefields. Missile bombardments, airstrikes, and shelling have taken a heavy toll on both sides, and civilians are paying the worst price of all. Ukrainians look to see the shooting cease at any cost.
Due to a series of summits and official statements, permanent peace continues to be beyond reach. Disputed and fundamental issues at the core of the war—borders, security guarantees, and Ukraine’s NATO status—are still at the negotiating table. Resolve, tenacity, and hard bargaining, as advocated for by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, will be required in order to seal a permanent accord.
Meanwhile, the world holds its breath as diplomats navigate this delicate and precarious ground, and looks to future talks to deliver more than promises, and Ukrainians come to someday exchange the ring of anxiety for the silence of peace.