Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

Russia perceives itself as having momentum and believes its military position will strengthen in the coming months. This confidence removes any urgency to negotiate or make significant concessions, making it the most significant impediment to ending the conflict.

Related Insights

Contrary to popular hope, a scenario where Ukraine fully expels Russia and regains all territory is a 'total fantasy.' Based on historical precedent, the war has only two realistic outcomes: a Ukrainian collapse under sustained pressure or a compromise peace that grants Russia de facto control of some territory.

The most significant challenge to a lasting peace is not agreeing on territorial lines but on the implementation sequence. Debates over whether a ceasefire, troop withdrawal, security guarantees, or referendums should come first create complex logistical and trust issues that could easily cause a deal to collapse.

A ceasefire won't eliminate underlying tensions. Instead, it could create new flashpoints, such as a breakdown of the agreement or instability in Belarus, potentially dragging NATO into a future conflict more directly than the current war.

Different parties are negotiating separate security guarantees and other arrangements in isolation. This prevents the necessary trade-offs for a holistic deal. A successful outcome requires getting all key stakeholders at the same table to discuss all issues together.

Ukraine's most realistic theory of success is not reclaiming all territory militarily, but leveraging its advantages to stabilize the front and inflict unsustainable casualties and economic costs on Russia. This strategy aims to make the war so futile for Moscow that it forces a favorable negotiated settlement.

Putin's desire to continue the war outweighs any potential benefits offered in negotiations. This persistence is not based on a reasonable assessment of the situation but on sunk costs, personal legacy, and a belief that Russia's sheer will can outlast Western support.

Russia views the presence of NATO-member troops as an unacceptable condition. The UK and French promise of such a deployment acts as a poison pill in negotiations, making a ceasefire agreement less likely, rather than serving as a credible deterrent against future aggression.

Despite perceived advantages, Russia's military performance in 2025 was poor. It achieved only incremental gains at the cost of soaring casualties, pushing their manpower losses beyond recruitment rates. This trend suggests that time is increasingly working against Moscow's ability to sustain offensive operations.

The idea that Ukraine must accept a peace deal because the war is "unwinnable" is a flawed narrative that mirrors Russian propaganda. This perspective overlooks Russia's massive daily casualties and straining wartime economy. The war is unsustainable, but arguably more so for Russia than for Ukraine.

A hastily constructed peace deal that stalls during implementation would create a 'neither war nor peace' scenario. This state of limbo would benefit Russia in the near term, as Ukraine would face pressure to demobilize and struggle with investment uncertainty, while Russia could maintain its military posture.