The Korean War ended in 1953 without a formal treaty, resulting in a situation often referred to as a "frozen conflict." This prolonged stalemate was marked by exhaustion and the looming threat of nuclear war. Experts suggest that the ongoing conflict in Ukraine may evolve into a similar scenario, characterized by a semi-permanent pause without a meaningful resolution, creating a persistent geopolitical issue that could escalate at any moment.

U.S. President Donald Trump has recently brokered peace agreements with several nations, including Vietnam, Cambodia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. However, Ukraine remains a challenge for him. Stephen Kotkin, a noted historian on Russia, remarked in 2016 that Russia's leaders might eventually recognize their limitations in opposing the West and attempting to dominate Eurasia. Until that realization occurs, Russia will continue to be a problem that needs management rather than a conflict to be decisively won.

Unlike the leaders Eisenhower faced, such as Mao and Stalin, Trump is dealing with Vladimir Putin, who appears to believe that Russia can reestablish itself as a significant Eurasian power. This belief persists despite Russia's demographic, economic, and technological decline, which increasingly positions it as a subordinate to China, similar to North Korea.

As Trump aims for a significant diplomatic achievement ahead of his Nobel Peace Prize application, the West remains divided on how to address the situation in Ukraine. The U.S. is reluctant to appear as though it has lost in Ukraine, yet, as JD Vance recently stated, it is also unwilling to bear the financial burden of a victory. Europe, having failed to adequately respond to Russia's aggressive actions since 2007, only began to confront the reality of the situation after Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022. While Europe has provided substantial financial support to Ukraine, it still lacks the credibility of a formidable military force, which has led Trump to bypass European leadership in negotiations.

Any agreement reached may not significantly alter the situation for Putin. Russian troops are unlikely to withdraw from Crimea or the Donbas region, nor from the land-bridge areas of Zaporizhzhia or Kherson. Putin might concede some minor territorial gains to allow Trump to announce a ceasefire or the potential for further negotiations, but these would likely lead to minimal changes on the ground. Ukraine, while unwilling to surrender any territory, is aware of its limitations in evicting Russian forces from the 20 percent of its land currently occupied.

The situation is tragic, as the people and territories of Ukraine may face de facto annexation by a declining power. This scenario mirrors the division of Korea, where no viable alternatives exist, and neither side can achieve a decisive victory without escalating to nuclear conflict. Putin seems to believe that the U.S. is already disengaging from Europe, despite maintaining its nuclear deterrent. A ceasefire could provide him with the opportunity to rearm and prepare for future challenges to European stability.

The potential for a crisis in the Taiwan Strait could further divert U.S. attention from Europe, creating a precarious situation. Trump's and Vance's frustrations with Europe's military capabilities overlook the historical context; Europe was not intended to defend itself post-1945 due to fears of a dominant continental power, particularly a resurgent Germany. This concern shaped U.S. and Western strategies during the Cold War.

As the U.S. appears to be shifting towards a role as an "offshore balancer" in Europe, it may need to demonstrate how an economically integrated yet militarily loose federation of states, supported by French and U.K. nuclear deterrents, can collectively deter and counter Russia's ambitions.