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.

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.

President Stubb uses Finland's peace with the USSR as a framework. Finland lost territory but preserved its nationhood. He argues Ukraine can secure an even better outcome through a peace deal: EU membership, massive reconstruction aid, and US security guarantees—a strategic victory that transcends battlefield lines.

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.

The proposed peace plan negotiated by private business figures asks Ukraine to cede heavily fortified territory that Russia has failed to capture despite years of fighting and immense casualties. This is not a peace deal but a demand for surrender that rewards Russian aggression by effectively giving away strategic land for free.

Ukraine should aim to become the 'South Korea' of Europe. This means accepting a negotiated peace or armistice that secures its independence and sovereignty over most of its territory, even if it doesn't reclaim everything. It can then rebuild into a prosperous democracy, creating a stark contrast with a decaying Russia.

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.

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.