The Easter ceasefire in Ukraine, which briefly raised hopes of a pause in hostilities, has faded into the background as both sides resume combat with renewed intensity. Thousands of violations were reported, and any illusion of de-escalation quickly vanished. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump, who is eyeing a second term and staking much of his foreign policy credibility on ending what he has dubbed a “Biden war,” is still without a concrete peace deal. His aspirations for a quick diplomatic resolution now appear mired in harsh geopolitical realities and growing internal opposition.

As Trump flirts with peace proposals and informal backchannel negotiations with Moscow, President Vladimir Putin is offering nothing short of victory on his terms. This dissonance-between Washington’s desire for face-saving diplomacy and Moscow’s demand for strategic triumph-reveals the depth of the stalemate. With both sides hardened in their positions and Europe continuing to arm Kyiv, the bitter truth may be this: peace, at least in the way many hope to define it, might not just be out of reach-it may no longer be desirable for those steering global strategy.

Trump’s central pitch is simple but ambitious: he claims he can end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of returning to office. His core argument is that the conflict is a legacy issue created by the Biden administration’s inept diplomacy and deep entanglement in a region whose problems cannot be solved by American intervention. He sees peace not just as a humanitarian or strategic goal but as a political necessity. Ending the war cleanly allows him to draw a bright red line between himself and Biden-and it offers a massive foreign policy victory for a campaign that thrives on spectacle.

But Trump faces a problem: any deal that appears too conciliatory toward Putin risks being framed as........

© Blitz