Freezing the Russia-Ukraine conflict in 2025, hope and feasibility

Entering 2025, from the battlefield situation, geopolitical confrontation and messages from all sides, public opinion has been discussing a lot about freezing the war and solutions to end the conflict in Ukraine. What is the truth and is it feasible? Let's find the answer from all relevant parties.

Ukraine, to give in or not to give in

With strong military, economic, political and diplomatic support and involvement from the West, in 2024, Kiev also achieved many things, preventing the Eastern defense line from collapsing, occupying most of Kursk province for many months and attacking with missiles and UAVs a number of targets deep inside Russian territory.

Under pressure from many sides, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky could not help but mention the possibility of accepting the temporary loss of part of his territory. (Source: AFP)

President Volodymyr Zelensky’s cards are the “European security threat from Moscow”, Kiev’s role as “Eastern flank warrior” and the valve for the pipeline to transport oil and gas from Russia. Kiev is increasingly dependent on the support of the US and the West. On the other hand, the EU is also being forced into the conflict in Ukraine, also a form of hostage.

The rapid influx of money and weapons from the US and the EU will help Kiev continue the war for a while longer, but the situation is unlikely to be any better than in 2024. It is especially difficult to reverse the largely unfavorable battlefield situation. The most likely course is to try not to lose the negotiation, hoping to have more time to improve the situation, and then consider the next step.

Inside Ukraine, there are ideas of peace and change of leadership, paving the way for a political and diplomatic solution. But currently there is no one capable of holding the flag and gathering the core forces.

Under pressure from many sides, President Zelensky could not help but mention the possibility of accepting a temporary loss of territory (which is actually controlled by Russia and difficult for Ukraine to regain militarily) in order to freeze the conflict. However, Kiev attached two preconditions: NATO guaranteed security by admitting Ukraine as a member and sending troops to monitor.

Russia certainly won’t accept even one of the demands. Some NATO members also abstained from voting in favor. So Kiev has made concessions that are essentially no or will gradually lower the bar. The fundamental issue remains the same. The ball is in the West’s court.

The Western dilemma and calculation

With so much weapons and money poured into Ukraine, the West and NATO will not easily give up the opportunity to get close and use others to weaken Russia. From January 1, 2025, it will be Poland's turn to take over the rotating presidency of the EU Council. Polish President Andrzej Duda, who pledged to raise the defense budget to 4.7% of GDP and spend 35% of it on buying US military equipment, will steer the EU in a tough direction, determined to strengthen the "Eastern shield" and transatlantic relations.

The "locomotives" of Germany and France show signs of derailment; there is no high consensus within the group on wholeheartedly supporting Ukraine and separating Russia from the "old continent". Some member states have conflicts of interest, especially the blockade of Ukraine's grain exports and Kiev's tight closure of pipeline valves... Food security and energy security are further aggravated by climate change.

The EU is in a dilemma, unable to give up, but finding it difficult to concentrate all its efforts on creating strategic autonomy in the comprehensive confrontation with Russia, with no end in sight. President Donald Trump’s statement on the commitment to security and economic relations has left the “old continent” elite bewildered. On the one hand, EU leaders pledged to support Ukraine to the end, on the other hand, they are considering a backup plan.

The new owner of the White House cannot but fulfill his commitment to ending the conflict in Ukraine. If the US can demonstrate its strength, leadership and dominance in the most complex international issues, the US “umbrella” will be more valuable. The idea of ​​the 47th President is to combine the “stick” (support, stronger military and economic involvement) and the “carrot” (gradual lifting of sanctions). However, how Russia responds is the important thing.

On January 7, US President-elect Donald Trump announced at a press conference at the Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida that the Russia-Ukraine conflict would end within 6 months.

What Russia wants and can do

Moscow has learned from the Minsk II agreement signed on February 12, 2015 between the Normandy Four, so it is not easy to fall into the trap of the West's calculated "conflict freezing".

Russia really wants to end the long and costly conflict with a “package solution” with the US and NATO, as declared at the opening of the special military operation and the draft peace agreement reached in Istanbul, Türkiye, in April 2022.

Given the current situation and what has been done, Moscow does not want to lower its demands, especially the recognition of the new status quo. Along with that is the future of normal, inseparable and equal relations between Russia and the EU, the West and the US.

Russian President Vladimir Putin attends a candlelight vigil and prayer service marking Christmas according to the Russian Orthodox calendar at St. George's Cathedral on Poklonnaya Hill in Moscow, January 6. (Source: Reuters)

From now on, Russia will continue to increase its military force on the front line, in Ukraine and completely restore Kursk, sending a strong message to the US, the West, NATO, creating the most advantageous position when agreeing to sit at the negotiating table. Does the birch country have enough strength for that calculation?

There are concerns about Russia's strength: not strong enough to launch a massive attack, deal a decisive blow, quickly break the defense line, destroy a large number of Ukrainian forces and vehicles, restore Kursk, and not allow the opponent's missiles and UAVs to act freely...

Thinking so is not understanding the art of war and the nature of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Russia's territory is too vast, the front line is over 1,000 km long, how many troops and weapons are needed to create a superior force and protect the rear? Moscow's firepower attacks with focus, not in a carpet-laying style like the US and the West did in Kosovo, the Gulf War...

The most important thing is that the birch country must confront the support of weapons, finance, advisory teams, military experts, military intelligence systems, satellite reconnaissance, space navigation... from many NATO and Western member countries.

Imagine if Russia put all its efforts into the Ukraine front, leaving its rear defenses empty, and NATO was approaching the border, would it sit still? Although there are still limitations, Moscow has made an effort to maintain such a position.

Not difficult and very difficult

Despite their different calculations, all parties involved are considering a solution to the conflict in Ukraine. Therefore, it is understandable that 2025 raises hopes. The difficulty is how and when?

If the US and the West stop supporting and engaging, the conflict will end sooner or later. But that is impossible. The most difficult thing, the biggest obstacle, is that the goals and objectives of the parties are contradictory.

The US, the West, and NATO cannot let Ukraine “lose everything” (which means Russia wins), but they also cannot “cover the field” forever, while victory is far away. They also do not want to directly confront Russia in World War III, even nuclear war, which means not to push Moscow into a corner.

The US wants the EU to be autonomous in its confrontation with Russia, so that it can have a free hand in dealing with China, but it also does not want its ally to escape its high-priced protectionism and domination. The EU also wants strategic autonomy, but is somewhat “powerless”.

President-elect Donald Trump said he would prioritize the task of ending the Russia-Ukraine conflict within six months. (Source: Ukrinform)

The most feasible step is to freeze the conflict, monitor it, suspend preconditions, and create an environment for dialogue and negotiation. The calculation of the West and NATO is to prevent Russia from winning and Ukraine from losing, creating time and conditions for Kiev to recover and consolidate with external support. As analyzed above, Russia does not want to repeat the Minsk II agreement, so this step is also quite vague.

There has been talk and hope of a summit between the new White House chief and President Vladimir Putin, seen as a breakthrough. The two leaders discussed the Ukraine issue in a give-and-take manner.

Common ground can be found if the parties compromise within their own calculations. When the conflict is deadlocked or nearing its limits, the possibility of negotiation appears. The level of compromise can be balanced or more beneficial to one side, depending on the correlation, situation and calculation.

Donald Trump has a lot of work to do when he officially takes office, first of all, establishing his apparatus and team of advisors. So the meeting, if there is one, will be at the earliest at the end of January.

The new occupant of the White House is decisive but very unpredictable. The Kremlin boss is also very decisive and unpredictable. So in 2025 there may be an opportunity to discuss a freeze in the war. Accepting the discussion is difficult, reaching a consensus and implementing it is even more difficult.

A complete resolution of the conflict is even more distant. It is difficult to say.

Source: https://baoquocte.vn/dong-bang-xung-dot-nga-ukraine-nam-2025-hy-vong-va-tinh-kha-thi-300002.html