Uploaded February 2026 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
As the war’s fourth anniversary approaches, there is still no clear end in sight—either on the battlefield or at the negotiating table. While direct talks between Russia, Ukraine, and the United States have begun, core questions remain unanswered: Does Moscow truly want to end the fighting while it maintains the upper hand on the battlefield? Are Ukraine’s leaders willing to make the difficult concessions necessary to stop the painful attacks on the battlefield, Kyiv and the energy grid—even if it costs them their political future? Could European leaders accept peace terms that require them to treat Moscow less as a pariah and more as a partner on the continent?
George Beebe and John Mearsheimer debated whether a peace agreement can be reached, or if the war’s complexities render diplomacy impractical, leaving victory on the battlefield as the only realistic outcome. George Beebe, director of Grand Strategy at the Quincy Institute and former Russia director at the CIA, argued that a peace agreement is possible. John Mearsheimer, R. Wendell Harrison distinguished professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, made the case that the war will only be settled on the battlefield. Emily Jashinsky, the host of the podcast AfterParty and a columnist at UnHerd, moderated.
*Download the full webinar transcript here*:
quincyinst-2.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/19135204/Debate_-Is-a-Peace-Agreement-in-Ukraine-Possible_.docx.pdf
###
Quincy Institute is an independent, nonprofit think tank.
Help fund our research: quincyinst.org/donations
Read our reporting: ResponsibleStatecraft.org
Twitter: https://x.com/QuincyInst
TikTok: tiktok.com/quincyinst
Facebook: facebook.com/quincyinst
Instagram: instagram.com//quincyinst
Website: quincyinst.org
As the war’s fourth anniversary approaches, there is still no clear end in sight—either on the battlefield or at the negotiating table. While direct talks between Russia, Ukraine, and the United States have begun, core questions remain unanswered: Does Moscow truly want to end the fighting while it maintains the upper hand on the battlefield? Are Ukraine’s leaders willing to make the difficult concessions necessary to stop the painful attacks on the battlefield, Kyiv and the energy grid—even if it costs them their political future? Could European leaders accept peace terms that require them to treat Moscow less as a pariah and more as a partner on the continent?
George Beebe and John Mearsheimer debated whether a peace agreement can be reached, or if the war’s complexities render diplomacy impractical, leaving victory on the battlefield as the only realistic outcome. George Beebe, director of Grand Strategy at the Quincy Institute and former Russia director at the CIA, argued that a peace agreement is possible. John Mearsheimer, R. Wendell Harrison distinguished professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, made the case that the war will only be settled on the battlefield. Emily Jashinsky, the host of the podcast AfterParty and a columnist at UnHerd, moderated.
*Download the full webinar transcript here*:
quincyinst-2.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/19135204/Debate_-Is-a-Peace-Agreement-in-Ukraine-Possible_.docx.pdf
###
Quincy Institute is an independent, nonprofit think tank.
Help fund our research: quincyinst.org/donations
Read our reporting: ResponsibleStatecraft.org
Twitter: https://x.com/QuincyInst
TikTok: tiktok.com/quincyinst
Facebook: facebook.com/quincyinst
Instagram: instagram.com//quincyinst
Website: quincyinst.org
