US President Donald Trump is pushing for a peaceful resolution to the three-year conflict in Ukraine between Russia and Ukraine. Think tanks have proposed several approaches aimed at achieving a lasting peace.
The maximum pressure strategy, outlined by the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA), calls for increased sanctions on Russian financial institutions and energy sector entities, as well as releasing frozen Russian assets to support Ukrainian defense and reconstruction. CEPA also recommends that Ukraine and Europe must be included in any peace talks with Russia.
In contrast, Josh Rudolph, a German Marshall Fund senior fellow, suggests approaching the negotiations from a position of strength, knowing when to walk away, combining sanctions with lower oil and gas prices, arming Ukraine, giving it all of Russia’s frozen assets, and making Europe pay more for weapons. He also recommends enabling American companies to rebuild Ukraine.
A report by the American Enterprise Institute found that supporting Ukraine to victory against Russia is in the best interest of the US, estimating an increase of $808 billion in defense spending over five years if Russia prevails. On the other hand, ending the war would result in a vibrant and free Ukraine with a newly modernized military.
The Heritage Foundation’s “Project 2025 Presidential Transition Project” takes a middle road, recommending continued US involvement in Ukraine but limited to military aid. The project emphasizes the importance of recognizing Communist China as the defining threat to US interests in the 21st century.
Source: https://www.voanews.com/a/four-scenarios-for-securing-peace-in-ukraine/7983483.html