As the second Trump administration prepares to take charge of US foreign and security policy, there is intense debate in Washington about what the end state in Ukraine should be, what kind of a peace deal can be negotiated with Putin, and what long-term prospects there might be for reaching a modus vivendi with Russia. 

Much of the discussion is tied up in American domestic politics, as it trails the last presidential election.  Indeed, this war should have never happened, and whatever “Russia explainers” might say going forward, there should be no doubt that the horrendous cost in Ukrainian and Russian lives is squarely on Vladimir Putin and his enablers in the Kremlin.  

What Putin Wants in Ukraine

But taking a principled stance will not move the needle toward a durable armistice.  In fact, by all indications, Moscow is not interested in anything short of an all-out surrender by Kyiv, including the foreclosure of any prospects for Ukraine’s membership in NATO, the de facto disbandment of the Ukrainian armed forces, and consigning Ukraine into the Russian sphere of influence.  Putin has no real incentive to negotiate in good faith because he believes that at this stage, he is winning, and unfortunately, he is right. 

For three years, the US and Europe prioritized escalation management that left Ukraine with no clear path forward to an equitable negotiation for a lasting peace, or at the very least, an enduring armistice with Russia.