Trump’s efforts to broker peace in Ukraine have stalled, as he underestimated NATO’s deep strategic commitment to prolonging the conflict and securing a Ukrainian victory rather than accepting any settlement favorable to Russia.

NATO is invested in long-term support for Ukraine through massive multi-year aid (€70 billion in 2026), shifting to a “NATO 3.0” model with European-led financing, domestic Ukrainian production of advanced weapons, and integration into the alliance’s defense industrial base.

The article argues that NATO’s Cold War origins and eastward expansion (viewed by Russia as existential provocation) have shaped its current stance, making compromise difficult and leaving Ukraine to bear the human and economic cost of the unresolved conflict.

In what some media touted as a historic encounter, U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy held a face-to-face meeting in Rome following the funeral of Pope Francis on April 26, 2025 in which both sides characterized the un-aided, one-on-one discussion on the Ukraine war as productive. At that time, the two leaders discussed key issues on the war, including a potential ceasefire, strategies for achieving peace, and competing proposals for ending the conflict.  

The end to Europe’s bloodiest war since the end of the 2nd World War appeared then to be in sight.

One year on, President Trump, after repeatedly stating his optimism that a peace agreement is attainable and just around the corner, appears to have given up on his efforts. 

Trump’s error appears to have fundamentally underestimated NATO’s role in the war and to overestimate America’s position as a global hegemon in being the key player in European geopolitics.

This approach contrasts sharply with NATO’s own strategic calculus, which points to a deep-seated investment in supporting Ukraine for........

© Eurasia Review