In evaluating the prospects for ending the war in Ukraine, experts note there have been no significant shifts in the positions of either Trump or Russia. Recollections go back to prior coordinated efforts by Ukraine and the US to agree on a full ceasefire, which stumbled amid policy changes in the US and faltering compromises.
The consensus is that a real path to ending the war is agreement on a ceasefire along the front line, with security guarantees currently out of reach. A notable shift has occurred in Trump’s strategy—from seeking accommodation with Putin to adopting a more rhetorical, ultimatum-based approach, which has influenced subsequent decisions by Russia.
The resumption of American arms supplies, repair of equipment, and growing involvement of Europeans as key donors are highlighted. However, the pace and consistency of Western help are criticized as insufficient, enabling Putin to continue hostilities. Swift solutions in sanctions, customs pressures, or arms delivery are not expected; there is no magic instrument for an instant end to the war.
Foreign partners are unlikely to let Ukraine lose the war, but their political and resource capacities for actual victory are also limited. Experts point to a lack of full societal preparedness within Ukraine for self-defense, which affects Western perceptions. Ultimately, responsibility for change also falls on Ukraine, the West, and particularly the evolving US strategy.
Gradual strengthening of sanctions and continued aid could be crucial in raising the cost of war for Russia and stabilizing the front. This, eventually, may pave the way for new ceasefire negotiations, though a fast result is unlikely.
