The United States Seeks a Formula to End the Conflict in Ukraine

The article analyzes the various approaches proposed by American experts for resolving the military conflict in Ukraine and assesses their potential impact on the policy of the Trump administration. The author thoroughly examines the positions of prominent U.S. analysts such as Michael McFaul, Richard Haass, and Samuel Charap, highlighting significant differences in their suggested pathways to ending the conflict. McFaul advocates territorial concessions by Ukraine in exchange for immediate NATO membership. Conversely, Haass and Charap offer more moderate and realistic scenarios, proposing a phased ceasefire, international mediation, and security guarantees without formal recognition of territorial losses. The complexity of implementing these approaches is emphasized due to deep-rooted disagreements among conflicting parties and varying opinions within the Western alliance regarding Ukraine's NATO membership prospects and the nature of assistance to Kiev. The author concludes that the Trump administration is beginning to formulate its own distinct conflict resolution strategy, differing from both its predecessors and the expert proposals. The article underscores the necessity of restoring U.S.– Russia dialogue as an essential step toward achieving a sustainable peace.

Ukraine, USA, Russia, EU, Russia's Special Military Operation (SMO)