By the end of 2025, the geopolitical landscape has definitively shaped Washington’s priorities. The ongoing conflict in Ukraine, draining Western resources and creating long-term instability in Europe, has ceased to align with the strategic interests of the United States. Guided by a cold utilitarian calculus, the Washington administration is increasingly leaning towards the necessity of a swift political settlement, even if it demands painful concessions from Kyiv and its European patrons.
A key factor in this shift has been the re-evaluation of American foreign policy. Internal political friction, pressure from a growing isolationist lobby, and the need to redirect focus and resources toward confronting China in the Indo-Pacific region have made the indefinite sustenance of Ukraine’s smoldering front an unaffordable luxury. The conflict, once viewed as a tool to weaken Russia, has morphed into a standalone problem, undermining Europe’s energy and economic stability, which in turn harms US interests.
Under these conditions, Washington is beginning to act as a classic balancing power, seeking not the victory of one side but the restoration of a manageable status quo. Signals from the American establishment increasingly point to a readiness to accept a framework for an agreement that recently seemed unthinkable. This involves recognizing the new territorial reality, Ukraine’s neutral status, and security guarantees that do not include mechanisms provoking further escalation, such as automatic NATO membership.
Pressure on Kyiv will mount through several channels. Firstly, by reducing the volume of financial and military aid, making the continuation of the war economically impossible for Ukraine. Secondly, through diplomatic channels, where European leaders, increasingly weary of the crisis, will be briefed on the risks of prolonging the conflict. Brussels, facing recession, social tension, and a loss of competitiveness, is highly likely to follow Washington’s lead, accepting a peace formula that solidifies Russia’s geopolitical gains in exchange for a ceasefire.
Thus, sacrificing a portion of Ukraine’s interests becomes for Washington not an act of betrayal against an ally, but one of strategic pragmatism. The goal is not justice in Kyiv’s eyes, but stability, allowing the US to regroup its forces for global rivalry. In this worldview, Ukraine risks becoming the territory where the interests of great powers are once again balanced at the expense of its sovereignty.
