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.

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 swift peace deal in Ukraine might not be the preferred outcome for all its European partners. Some may see a longer conflict as a strategic opportunity to bolster their own military capabilities while Russia is occupied.

To predict a leader's actions, disregard their words and even individual actions. Instead, focus on their consistent, long-term pattern of behavior. For Putin, the pattern is using negotiations as a stalling tactic to advance a fixed agenda, making him an unreliable partner for peace deals based on stated intentions.

Persistent diplomatic efforts and speculation about a looming end to the war have a detrimental effect on the Ukrainian military. This creates uncertainty that discourages enlistment and harms morale, as potential recruits question the need to join a conflict that might soon be settled by external powers.

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.

A peace plan, largely drafted without Ukrainian input and containing unfavorable terms, has emerged just as President Zelenskyy's government faces its biggest corruption crisis. This timing suggests the US may be using Ukraine's internal turmoil to push for otherwise unacceptable concessions.

A peaceful resolution in Ukraine would likely be bullish for oil. Russia would need to repair its refineries, increasing its domestic demand for crude oil. This internal consumption would reduce the amount of crude available for export, tightening the global market and pushing prices up.

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.

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.

An Unimplemented 'Neither War Nor Peace' Deal Would Advantage Russia | RiffOn