Case Study
Background Context
The Russia-Ukraine conflict, now approaching four years of full-scale warfare, represents Europe’s deadliest conflict since World War II. The December 2025 negotiations at Mar-a-Lago mark a critical juncture, with parties claiming the peace plan is “90% agreed” despite significant unresolved issues.
Key Stakeholders
- Ukraine: Seeking security guarantees and territorial integrity while facing pressure to compromise
- United States: Acting as primary mediator under Trump’s administration, balancing engagement with both parties
- Russia: Pursuing maximalist territorial demands and strategic concessions from the West
- European Union: Part of the Coalition of the Willing, offering security support and potential EU membership pathway
- NATO: Indirectly involved through alliance expansion concerns raised by Russia
Core Negotiation Elements
The draft peace plan has evolved from 28 points to 20 points, reflecting ongoing revisions. Central issues include the duration and nature of security guarantees (15 years proposed vs. 30-50 years requested), territorial control in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region, the fate of occupied infrastructure like Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, demilitarized zone arrangements, post-war Ukrainian military size, and monitoring mechanisms for ceasefire enforcement.
Critical Tensions
Putin’s continued military advances and maximalist demands contradict peaceful rhetoric, creating trust deficits. Russia’s alleged drone attack on a presidential residence and threats of retaliation demonstrate ongoing escalation risks. The gap between what Ukraine can accept and Russia demands remains substantial, particularly regarding territorial concessions.
Outlook
Short-Term Trajectory (1-3 months)
Negotiations will likely continue through early 2025 with the Coalition of the Willing meeting in January and subsequent trilateral discussions between Ukraine, European partners, and the US. Russia may escalate military pressure to strengthen its negotiating position before any formal agreement. The finalization of security guarantee frameworks will be critical, requiring congressional approval in the US and coordination among European partners.
Medium-Term Scenarios (6-12 months)
Optimistic Scenario: A comprehensive agreement is reached with robust security guarantees, monitored ceasefire zones, and a pathway for Ukraine’s EU integration. International peacekeeping forces deploy to monitor demarcation lines, and reconstruction efforts begin in non-disputed territories.
Realistic Scenario: A partial agreement emerges covering ceasefire lines and basic security frameworks, but key issues remain unresolved or subject to ongoing negotiation. The conflict transitions to a frozen state similar to previous regional disputes, with sporadic violations and continued diplomatic tensions.
Pessimistic Scenario: Negotiations collapse due to irreconcilable differences over territorial control and security arrangements. The conflict intensifies with renewed offensives, potentially expanding beyond current boundaries or involving new actors.
Long-Term Implications (3-5 years)
The durability of any agreement will depend heavily on enforcement mechanisms and changing political landscapes. US domestic politics following the 2028 election could alter American commitment levels. Russia’s economic sustainability under sanctions and its domestic political stability will influence compliance. Ukraine’s reconstruction needs, estimated in hundreds of billions of dollars, will require sustained international support and create dependencies that shape future relationships.
Solutions
Multi-Layered Security Architecture
Establish tiered security guarantees combining immediate and long-term protections. The first tier would involve bilateral US security guarantees with congressional authorization for 30-50 years, including military assistance, intelligence sharing, and rapid response commitments. The second tier would incorporate European coalition commitments through the Coalition of the Willing, with binding defense cooperation agreements. The third tier would integrate Ukraine’s EU membership pathway as a structural security guarantee, even without immediate NATO membership.
Territorial and Sovereignty Framework
Create interim arrangements for disputed territories that preserve Ukraine’s legal sovereignty while acknowledging realities on the ground. Establish internationally monitored demilitarized zones in contested areas with joint economic zones that allow civilian activity while restricting military presence. Deploy UN or multinational peacekeeping forces along agreed demarcation lines with robust mandates to deter violations. Implement a phased approach to territorial questions, potentially including future referendums under international supervision once conditions stabilize.
Economic Reconstruction and Integration
Launch a Marshall Plan-scale reconstruction initiative funded by international partners, seized Russian assets, and multilateral development banks. Condition reconstruction aid on compliance with ceasefire terms by all parties. Fast-track Ukraine’s EU integration process to provide economic stability and political anchoring. Establish special economic zones in border regions to facilitate trade and reduce economic motivations for conflict.
Verification and Compliance Mechanisms
Deploy comprehensive monitoring systems using satellite surveillance, ground-based sensors, and international observer teams. Create clear escalation procedures and consequences for violations, including automatic sanctions triggers and military response options. Establish regular trilateral review processes involving Ukraine, Russia, and mediating powers to address emerging issues before they escalate. Maintain sustained diplomatic engagement through permanent negotiating channels.
Russian Interest Accommodation
Address legitimate Russian security concerns through verified commitments on NATO expansion timelines and military deployments in border regions. Develop a phased sanctions relief program conditional on compliance with agreement terms and specific benchmarks. Negotiate the unfreezing of Russian state assets in exchange for reparations payments to Ukraine. Create diplomatic frameworks that give Russia constructive roles in European security architecture while constraining aggressive behavior.
Impact
Humanitarian Impact
An effective peace agreement would immediately reduce civilian casualties, currently numbering in the tens of thousands, and allow humanitarian access to occupied territories. Millions of displaced Ukrainians could begin returning home, though the process would take years and depend on security guarantees. Access to essential services like healthcare and education would be restored in conflict-affected regions. However, landmines and unexploded ordnance will pose long-term dangers requiring extensive demining efforts.
Regional Security Dynamics
A successfully negotiated peace would establish precedents for resolving territorial disputes in the post-Soviet space, potentially encouraging or discouraging similar conflicts depending on the perceived fairness of terms. European security architecture would undergo fundamental transformation, with enhanced defense cooperation among EU members and renewed debates about collective defense mechanisms. NATO’s role and expansion timeline would be recalibrated based on agreement terms. Border states would reassess their security postures and alliance relationships.
Global Geopolitical Implications
The outcome will signal whether territorial conquest remains viable in the 21st century, influencing calculations by other powers regarding their own territorial ambitions. US credibility as a security guarantor and negotiator will be tested by its ability to enforce any agreement terms. The effectiveness of economic sanctions as a foreign policy tool will be evaluated based on their role in bringing parties to negotiations. China will closely observe the process as it considers its own approaches to disputed territories.
Economic Consequences
Ukraine’s reconstruction will require an estimated 400-500 billion dollars over the next decade, creating massive infrastructure and investment opportunities but also dependencies on international financial support. European energy markets will continue adjusting to reduced Russian supply reliance, potentially accelerating renewable energy transitions. Sanctions relief or continuation will significantly impact global commodity markets, particularly for grain, energy, and fertilizers. Investment flows into Eastern Europe will depend heavily on perceived stability of any settlement.
Institutional and Normative Impact
International law regarding territorial integrity, self-determination, and the use of force will be interpreted through the lens of this settlement. The United Nations’ effectiveness in conflict resolution and peacekeeping will be judged by its role in implementation. Multilateral institutions like the EU, NATO, and OSCE will be strengthened or weakened based on their contributions to peace and their relevance in the emerging security order. The precedent set for accountability regarding war crimes and atrocities will influence future conflicts.
Ukraine’s Domestic Trajectory
Any peace agreement will profoundly shape Ukraine’s political development, economic model, and national identity. Security guarantees will determine the size and nature of Ukraine’s military forces, affecting defense spending and conscription policies. EU integration will drive institutional reforms in governance, rule of law, and anti-corruption efforts. Domestic political stability will depend on public perception of whether territorial concessions are justified by security gains. National unity could be tested by regional differences in support for various agreement terms.
Long-Term Stability Considerations
The true impact of any agreement will only be measurable over decades. Agreements perceived as imposed or unjust historically create conditions for future conflicts. The success of economic integration and reconstruction will be critical to building constituencies for peace on all sides. Generational change in leadership across involved countries will test the durability of commitments. Climate change and technological disruption could introduce new tensions or cooperation opportunities that reshape relationships established by current negotiations.