Is a Peace Agreement Possible to End the Ukraine War? The Russo-Ukraine War has long since slowed to a grinding halt in which neither side seems capable of making meaningful territorial gains; neither side appears capable of forcing the other into capitulation.

Accordingly, a peace agreement seems the most reasonable way to end the conflict.

But a peace agreement doesn’t seem to be on the immediate agenda. So, how far are we from ending the Russo-Ukraine War through a peace agreement, and what needs to happen for peace to take hold?

Peace through Defense for Ukraine? 

The Biden administration is still escalating the conflict in Ukraine, still sending weapons and funds, meaning peace seems unlikely in the near future.

Actually, Biden just gave permission to use American weapons to strike inside Russian territory and is considering the deployment of NATO soldiers to Ukraine (for training purposes).

So while Biden could compel the Ukraine to negotiate for peace, either explicitly, or implicitly through the withholding of arms and cash, Biden seems committed to funding Ukraine’s continued push to expel the Russians from Eastern Ukraine.

The Ukrainians, for their part, are still invested in the war, advocating for more weapons and more money, under the guise that the right weapons, and enough money, will crack the Russian seal and allow for Ukrainian victory. But victory for Ukraine seems unlikely; Russia is simply more powerful, and Putin appears deeply committed to the invasion he initiated in February 2022, despite suffering nearly half a million casualties and the degradation of Russian political capital on the global stage.

With Ukraine and Russia on year three of an impasse, with a peace settlement seeming inevitable, the question becomes, what can Ukraine do to ensure they have the strongest possible negotiating position? Investing in offensive weapons has so far failed to pay dividends for Ukraine; an expensive and highly touted Ukrainian counteroffensive failed last year. Additionally, “public support for Kyiv across the West is declining, and the conflict is at a stalemate,” Foreign Affairs reported.

So, accordingly, some pundits are proposing that Ukraine invest in defense, and solidify their position before sitting down to negotiate terms of peace.

“If Ukraine can defend the territory it control in the coming months by using capabilities such as antitank mines and concrete fortifications, it can deny Russia a path to complete victory and perhaps even open the door for negotiations,” Emma Ashford and Kelly A. Greico wrote. “Putin evidently believes that time is on his side; a strong, sustainable Ukrainian defense would prove him wrong.”

But according to Ashford and Greico, Ukraine (and America) needs to pursue defense for the right reasons. “On both sides of the Atlantic, defense is viewed largely as a stopgap measure to buy time to build capacity for future offensive operations.” But defense “can itself be a path to victory if Ukraine and its Western backers can succeed in convincing Putin that there is no way for him to achieve [his] strategic objectives.”

Regardless, a suit for peace does not appear to be on anyone’s immediate agenda.

About the Author: Harrison Kass 

Harrison Kass is a defense and national security writer with over 1,000 total pieces on issues involving global affairs. An attorney, pilot, guitarist, and minor pro hockey player, Harrison joined the US Air Force as a Pilot Trainee but was medically discharged. Harrison holds a BA from Lake Forest College, a JD from the University of Oregon, and an MA from New York University. Harrison listens to Dokken.

All images are Creative Commons or Shutterstock.

This piece has been updated to fix a coding error.