What’s Russia’s Next Move in Ukraine—and in Europe?

Steve Odland: Welcome to C-Suite Perspectives, a signature series by The Conference Board. I'm Steve Odland from The Conference Board and the host of this podcast series. And in today's conversation, we're going to talk about the status of the Russia-Ukraine war, and what could finally bring peace. 

Joining me today is Dr. Lori Esposito Murray, senior fellow for national security and managing director of CEO programs at the Council on Foreign Relations. She's also the former president of the Committee for Economic Development, which is the public policy center of The Conference Board. 

Lori, welcome back.  

Lori Esposito Murray: Thank you, Steve. And thank you for the invitation to come back. Important topic.  

Steve Odland:Yeah, important topic. Lori, just give us an overview of what the status is on this longtime Russia-Ukraine war.  

Lori Esposito Murray: Basically, Steve, now that we're in the fourth year of war, after more than three years of war, it'spretty much at a stalemate. Most of the media seems to be leaning towards Russia having the momentum and the advantage, but in fact, there was a military analysis out of Europe that basically said that, over the past three months, Russia has only been seizing 2.5 square miles a day, which mean it would take years for it to actually acquire the territory of Ukraine. And it's moving very slowly in its advances. 

So basically, the war is at a stalemate. Ukraine is clearly hurt by the need for more military supplies and the Russian change in tactics, where they're bombarding single cities at one time to really draw down the Ukrainian supplies of missiles. Basically looking at it, three-and-a-half years in, fourth year of war, it's at a stalemate.  

Steve Odland:So what regions now are totally occupied by Russia? It's the Donbas in the east and, of course, Crimea, which they took in 2014. Is it the entirety of the Donbas region?  

Lori Esposito Murray:Basically, the overall figure is that Russia controls about 20%, this is not including Crimea, 20% of Ukraine territory. And on that borderline of the Russian advances and the Ukrainian pushbacks, it keeps moving back and forth, mostly in Russian momentum now. But as I said, it'svery small advances in terms of seizing territory. 

There's one thing that has changed since the beginning of the year, or particularly since February, when the US has really put a very intensive effort into trying to get a ceasefire. In fact, and this happens in most wars when ceasefire has become an issue, the intensity of the war has increased, and the number of civilian deaths in Ukraine has markedly gone up over this three-month period versus the same time last year. That was a UN report that just came out last week.  

Steve Odland: Are those civilian deaths deliberate?  

Lori Esposito Murray: Yes, it'sbasically a strategy that the Russians are doing. They've altered their strategy somewhat in terms of how they're approaching the war in terms of their missile strikes and their ballistic, which include ballistic missiles, drones. And what they're doing is targeting single cities at a time with massive attacks so that it's much more difficult for the Ukrainians to defend a massive attack in one place in terms of air defenses.  

Steve Odland: But isn't the deliberate attack on civilian people and operations against the Geneva Convention? 

Lori Esposito Murray: Yes. And what's interesting is what's been in the news is the Victory Day parade and the grand pomp and circumstance happening in Moscow. In fact, the European foreign ministers at the same time were meeting in Lviv in Ukraine and came out with the statement that they are going to double down on the efforts in terms of Russia actually proceeding in this war as war criminals.  

Steve Odland: OK. Now the US appears to be backing off its intensive support with arms and munitions. But it also appears that the Europeans have been stepping up some of their support. Where does that lie in the balance?  

Lori Esposito Murray: So that is definitely happening, and actually for the US, it's been happening over 2024 as well as with the new administration. But during 2024, as you recall, Congress was holding up providing new aid to Ukraine. And so there was a real slow down there, and the Europeans were recognizing that, hoping that the US would continue its support by recognizing the danger, particularly to Ukraine and Europe, as far as supplying military supplies to Ukraine. 

And so they have continued their efforts, have stepped up their efforts in terms of supporting Ukraine. And the US, we still are working under the authorized Biden administration military supplies, and just recently, it was released that the US would be supplying more air defense to Ukraine. That's still under the Biden authorization, but that is going to, basically draw down by this summer.  

And the Europeans have been stepping up. They've been stepping up in their support. It's interesting because overall, the Europeans have actually supplied more aid, both military and humanitarian, to Ukraine than the US. But of course, that'sa large number of countries versus the US as a single country.  

Steve Odland:Yeah. And this is a deliberate attempt by the administration to get the Europeans to step up their involvement here in support and funding for Ukraine, and really for NATO, in defense of NATO's Eastern front, in order to allow a pivot to Asia and also to deal with, incursions in the Arctic and all of that, which we're not going to get into today. This is part of a larger geopolitical strategy, as you have said before. 

Now recently intelligence has said that Russia has begun to build large bases and camps that can hold over 10,000 soldiers a piece all along the Finnish border. And of course, we've seen increased activity through the Kaliningrad corridor and so forth that would essentially encircle the three Baltic states. 

So what is Russia's strategy here? Is it to try to pivot from Ukraine, take what they've got, pivot to these other places, and then perhaps do an incursion into the Baltics or Finland? 

Lori Esposito Murray: Clearly, if there was a ceasefire and a cessation to the war in Ukraine, that gives Russia the opportunity to actually move assets to focus on the European borders and Finland now, as you mentioned, since Finland and Sweden have both become members of NATO, the Finland border becomes very important. It's about an 830-mile border with the Russians. It becomes very important on both sides of that border, and the Russians are doing a significant buildup, first of their military. They've moved from about a million troops to 1.3, and now they're aiming for 1.5 million troops. They're building, as you said, extensive army bases along the European borders.  

But it even goes beyond that in terms of what Russia is doing as far as incursions into Europe. Because there's this whole gray zone of activity that they've been doing, including cutting the internet lines undersea, undermining with cyberattacks the Baltic countries. They've been accused of being involved in the planting of bombs in the air transport of DHL company transport systems. 

Sothere's a lot going on in terms of what Europe is experiencing as far as Russian aggression, on a whole range of levels. And obviously if there was a cessation of military activity in Ukraine, that just provides more space and more time and more geography for Russia to pay attention to. 

Steve Odland: And cost. And which further sanctions would potentially throttle down in the US, or the US is continuing to consider that in the state. All right, so the US is trying, and Donald Trump ran a campaign on, ending the Russia-Ukraine war on day one, quote unquote. It's now past day 100, and that has not happened, thereby frustrating the administration. But what is the status of those peace negotiations?  

Lori Esposito Murray:So there were really several main issues, and right now it's been an ebb and flow in terms of the president's embracing of the Russians and the Ukrainians. 

And right now and we've all, we all saw what happened in the Oval Office with President Zelensky. But right now the president seems to be getting frustrated with Putin and the Russians in terms of moving forward. But there are basically, I would say, about five or six main issues. 

And one of them, and this is very important to the president, is the unconditional 30-day ceasefire. Now, President Zelensky has embraced that. Putin has not, and has actually been frustrating the president. Putin had called for his own 72-hour ceasefire because of the victory parade and celebrations in Moscow, which were dismissed as basically being a farce, nothing to them. And so that's an area that's really frustrating to the president, but it's also key to actually getting any movement on some sort of conclusion to these hostilities and to the Russian invasion. 

So the ceasefire is hanging out there as a major issue, and what the president wants to do is a ceasefire now, and then negotiate on the issues. So what are the major issues? Obviously, security guarantees are absolutely critical to Ukraine. They want security guarantees. The president and the major players in the administration have made it clear that the US is not considering getting engaged in security guarantees. And President Zelensky is looking at Europe, with US backing. That is, basically Putin said, that's a nonstarter for him to have foreign troops in Ukraine. So that's a major issue.  

And if you look at the armistice in North Korea, although that still remains one of the most dangerous places on Earth in terms of conflict and conflagration, the reason why that has held is because of the 28,000 US troop presence in South Korea, the guarantees, the defensive treaty we have with South Korea. So US security guarantees were very important for the Korean problem. And that's being looked at as a possible alternative, of doing an armistice and not a peace agreement, but you can't disassociate the armistice from the US security guarantees.  

OK. Other major issues, obviously territory. And here President Zelensky has actually shown a little bit of flexibility, at least in terms of the wording of the peace proposal that he was discussing, reportedly, with President Trump at the Vatican, at Pope Francis' funeral. And here the US agrees with Russia in terms of Crimea. But what's interesting is the US administration leaders on this issue working with Ukrainians have also indicated to Ukraine that even though the US will support Russia on Crimea, that the Ukrainians don't have to. 

And that'sactually an interesting issue because President Zelinsky says, according to his constitution, they can't cede any territory. And there's a little bit of flexibility there. But then of course it's what to do with the Russian incursions into Ukraine and the Donbas and Luhansk areas, as well as in the south. And here, the US is saying, let's freeze the lines right now. 

And then, in terms of discussions forward, the other interesting issue was the Ukrainian government and President Zelensky. And here you saw, I believe you saw the president actually supporting the Russians on having an election in Ukraine. But it seems like he has really moved on that, most likely recognizing the difficulty of holding an election right now and who could actually, lead and do a ceasefire and do negotiations if Zelensky was to step down. And what had happened in Ukraine is that the elections were suspended because of the war, which Zelensky has argued is exactly what Churchill did in England when England was being attacked by the Germans. 

The other two issues, I would say, are the Ukrainian military. And here the US actually supports Ukraine and has said this pretty openly that Ukraine needs to have a military. And of course, Russia and President Putin have said there have to be large constraints on and limitations on the Ukrainian military. And finally, is this interesting and nondescript but very large issue that President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov keep mentioning over and over again over the past three-some-odd years, is that the negotiations and the agreement have to deal with the larger and broader issues that actually led, the foundations for the problem that happened with Ukraine. 

That implies Ukraine and NATO, but it also goes beyond that, implies NATO expansion into Europe, plus a whole host of other issues that Putin has indicated over the years, democracy support. It's hard to fully understand the breadth and depth of what they are, what they're discussing. But Putin is definitely putting this in a much larger context of European security and even the broader issues with the United States.  

Steve Odland:We're talking about the Russia-Ukraine War and potential peace settlement. We're going to take a short break and be right back. 

Welcome back to C-Suite Perspectives. I'm your host, Steve Odland, from The Conference Board, and I'm joined today by Dr. Lori Esposito Murray, senior fellow for national security and managing director of CEO programs at the Council on Foreign Relations. OK, so Lori you, before the break, you were talking about, the various positions from Ukraine, Russia, and the US. Some of those positions seem to be relatively resolved, and others just are a large gap. 

Can you just summarize here. just to kick off again, to summarize briefly, where are the big gaps?  

Lori Esposito Murray: The first and most important big gap to get anything started is the agreement on a 30-day ceasefire. So that's critical. And there you have obviously the US leading, Zelensky supporting, and Putin not moving on that issue and frustrating President Trump. That's where his major frustration is.  

Steve Odland: The 30 day, it's NATO, joining NATO, and it's peacekeeping forces in territory of Ukraine. Those are the big ones. So I don't understand this 30-day thing because, actually if you did a 30-day ceasefire, it gives Russia a chance to regroup and actually positions them to relaunch an offensive. Why is that so important?  

Lori Esposito Murray: Right now, it's so important to the president, to our President Trump. He's been very much focused on the killings, and the fact that this war is going nowhere. And the death and the destruction is really extensive, phenomenal, almost breathtaking when you see the comparisons of the pictures of what Ukraine did look like, when you look at the numbers of civilians and forces, civilians on the Ukrainian side and forces on both sides, the numbers of deaths and injuries that have happened. So that's why the ceasefire is important.  

Steve Odland:It's important, but they don't want to do it. And at the same time, it's holding up then the discussion on the long-term resolution. So why not just focus on the long-term resolution and see if you can get that done rather well? 

Lori Esposito Murray:I think part of the concern is that the long-term agreement is probably more out of reach than a ceasefire. And to your point, Steve, the ceasefire is not necessarily within reach, but the longer-term decisions about what the security guarantees will be for Ukraine, what's the role of Europe, can this be done without the US, what will Russia accept in terms of Ukrainian military in terms of Ukraine's role in Europe? 

We should mention that what's interesting is the issue of Ukraine in the EU seems to have dropped off the table and is not an issue anymore. When in fact, that was the major underlying issue that led to the Russian-leaning President of Ukraine actually leaving and going back to Moscow after the protests in the Maidan. But that seems to be off the table. So Ukraine having a role in Europe economically doesn't seem to be an issue, but these larger issues of territory and security. Having an agreement that is actually an agreement that can ensure the peace versus one that's just a way station until Russia decides to move again on Ukrainian territory and sovereignty.  

Steve Odland:Yeah. OK. Solet's talk about that. Do you think President Zelensky is prepared to cede the Donbas. 

Lori Esposito Murray: I don't think President Zelinsky is prepared to cede the Donbas. What an agreement may look like is that he does not acknowledge that as territory that belongs to Russia or territory that right now is independent and Russia has recognized. But is there a workaround just like in Crimea where you have a situation where you have an agreement, and Ukraine doesn't have to acknowledge that Crimea is part of Russia. And Russia can acknowledge that it is part of Russia. But you're focusing more on the ending of hostilities and trying to get some sort of stability in the areas of contention, which is really the areas of Donbas, the bridge, the territory in the south, that's the bridge to Crimea, to Russia. 

So you're dealing with actually pausing hostilities in a ceasefire that are then supported by security guarantees. And, as I was mentioning, the North Korean armistice is an example that people are turning to, but that really required diplomatic support and security guarantees from the US in terms of defense treaties and broader US role in Asia, as well as stationing of troops in South Korea. 

Soyou're going to look at something that's going to be much more robust. And whether it's European forces or however you do it, the security guarantees have to be robust enough to hold the peace or to hold the cessation of hostilities. 

Steve Odland:Yeah, and this peacekeeping, you can understand from Russia's point of view why they don't want to mass even more foreign troops on their border in Ukraine. On the other hand, there has to be some stabilizing factor. Otherwise, you can get a peace agreement, everybody goes home, and then Russia just picks it back up and goes at it again. There needs to be some validation on both sides.  

Lori Esposito Murray:Yeah. Which is exactly what the Minsk agreements were that led to the Russian invasion when they fell apart in the beginning of 2022 and led to, matter of fact, two days before the Russian incursion, invasion into Ukraine, on February 24, I believe, the Minsk agreements fell apart, and Russia pulled out two or three days before that. So you need agreements that can hold. You need agreements will only hold with security guarantees.  

Steve Odland: Would Russia acquiesce to a UN presence? 

Lori Esposito Murray:So Russia says right now it would not acquiesce to any foreign troop presence in Ukraine. Whether peacekeeping force isa viable alternative? UN peacekeeping efforts have a mixed record. And so it really depends on the intentions of the two warring parties. 

Steve Odland:Yeah. Recently, there's been this rare-earth minerals deal between the US and Ukraine. Can you just describe where that ended up, and what does it do for each country?  

Lori Esposito Murray:It's interesting. And so you have the actual agreement, Steve, and then you have the broader meanings of the agreement. And so basically, the minerals agreement is the US and Ukraine agreeing that they will share in the revenue, on the profits of the investment in terms of developing and building out the infrastructure and developing the mineral resources in Ukraine. It includes oil and gas. But in terms of critical minerals, Ukraine has about 5% of the world's supply of critical minerals. Now, there's a big question because the mapping is very old, and the Soviet mapping has a lot of these minerals in the areas that Russia controls. 

But in any case, it is a rich resource for minerals. And as I mentioned, oil and gas is also included and the US would basically profit share, 50-50. And they would set up a reconstruction investment fund to actually manage all of this. Ukraine would still control the actual leases and make those decisions in terms of its minerals. And the US, basically, it is not a right of refusal, but no other agreement can be made that's on better terms than any agreement that the US has an opportunity to participate in. 

So that's the construct of the agreement. It really emphasizes how President Trump sees this relationship going forward as a transactional relationship. If we're going to help you, this is going to be a partnership, and we're going to be invested in this development. 

Couple of interesting aspects. Anyone who has participated in the effort, in terms of the incursion, cannot benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine. And that I think is broader than cutting Russia out. I think that may cut out potentially anyone who has supported Russia in this effort. And the big question is, since China controls 90% of the critical and rare-earth minerals, mines across the world, resources across the world, you have to wonder, particularly in terms of rare-earth minerals, you have to wonder whether that bars China from being involved. 

But in any case, it's a framework agreement. The details still have to be worked out. But I'd like to get to the broader implications of the significance of the agreement, which is that how the administration is seeing it, how the US is seeing is as a commitment to Ukraine. And the words are in the agreement as a sovereign, free country. Which is a big step in terms of actually having that in an agreement, that we are invested in the future of Ukraine. And the administration also argues that this is a major security guarantee because we are financially invested in Ukraine. 

And as part of the deal, at least as President Zelensky has described it, was that two more air defense batteries will be going to most likely going to Ukraine. One coming from Israel, and the other one may come from Germany or Greece. Quid pro quo here, in terms of the minerals deals also led to the release of the agreement on two more air defense batteries for Ukraine. It signals to the Russians, the US is invested in Ukraine's future, both literally and figuratively. And it also provides this transactional relationship that'svery important to President Trump in terms of the US.  

Steve Odland:So Lori, just wrapping up then, what are your odds on a deal, a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine?  

Lori Esposito Murray: So in order for it to work, I think it really relies on President Putin recognizing that ceasing hostilities—and I think that's really the best you're going to get here, is a ceasefire with guarantees, security guarantees for Ukraine—that actually ceasing hostilities is in his interest. 

Right now, and particularly this very big splashy pompous show on Victory Day, President Putin, I think, is really signaling that he's riding high. He had President Xi there right after the invasion, in 2022, February 2022, the Victory Day in Moscow, there wasn't a single foreign visitor. Last year, there were only nine, and this year they have 20-plus. But most importantly, President Xi came to the Victory Day, showing that Russia's not isolated. Russia's finding alternative relationships, and the most important being China in terms of its economy. 

But it'sa very expensive war. The military budgets are going up. The finance ministry has just reassessed the extent of their deficits, which will put further pressure on their foreign reserves, which are dwindling. They have inflation of 10%, food inflation's even higher. And nevermind the number of casualties, injuries, and deaths that the Russia military is undergoing. 

So how long can Russia maintain this? Putin has to come to that recognition that it's more in his interests to cease hostilities. And I think it's really on his recognition of that. And I think President Trump is trying to push him there.  

Steve Odland: But what are the odds, Lori? What are the odds?  

Lori Esposito Murray: President Trump is trying to push him there with the threat of further sanctions, where he'll do secondary sanctions on any country involved in Russia's oil trade. Those are really significant sanctions, but there were already significant sanctions. Whether Russia can work around that again with their black fleet of tankers, nonetheless, it's a serious threat. 

What are the odds? I would say the odds today are maybe 30-70 that Russia will move anytime soon. But I think if the US stays involved, and this is a critical point because Vice President Vance has been indicating, and so has the president directly, that if there isn't a ceasefire agreement soon, he's out, the US is out, and we're not going to stay involved in this. 

I think if the US stays involved, and the president keeps pushing on this, that will move the odds in a much more favorable direction.  

Steve Odland: I would have guessed the opposite, that we're only at a 30% probability, and everything that you said moves it more to zero. But we're in the middle of it.  

Lori Esposito Murray: But I'lladd on a closing note here. The US is a really significant country and a really significant power. And I think if we utilize that leverage, we have shown, and I think we can continue to show, that we can make an important difference in the world. 

Steve Odland: All right, we'll leave it there. Dr. Lori Esposito Murray, thanks for discussing the Russia-Ukraine situation with us today.  

Lori Esposito Murray: Thanks, Steve. Appreciate the invitation.  

Steve Odland: And thanks to all of you for listening to C-Suite Perspectives. I'm Steve Odland, and this series has been brought to you by The Conference Board.