Ukraine will mark the fourth anniversary of Vladimir Putin’s barbaric invasion on Tuesday, February 24.

The date will serve as a cruel reminder of just how long this war has been raging, especially as the third round of trilateral talks between Russia, Ukraine and the US failed to make any significant progress last week.

Moscow’s refusals to give up its maximalist goals weigh down Donald Trump’s push for a speedy peace deal – though the US president continues to falsely blame Kyiv for the stagnant talks.

Earlier this week, he told reporters that it was going to be “very easy” to reach a deal.

But he warned: “Ukraine better come to the table, fast. That’s all I’m telling you. We are in a position, we want them to come.”

Desperate to secure an agreement and consolidate his supposed reputation as a “deal-maker”, Trump has time and time again promised a truce is on the horizon – all while Russian strikes continue to target Ukraine.

But, as Ukraine enters its fifth year of war, could the president be right, and an end is in sight?

HuffPost UK asked experts just how realistic Trump’s claims are – and if there are any alternatives to a formal peace agreement.

British officials are confident that Ukraine can hold its ground on the battlefield in the east, even after a challenging winter where Russia repeatedly targeted Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

That enables Kyiv to hold a firmer line in negotiations – like refusing to give into Putin and Trump’s demands that Ukraine gives up even more land.

But there are fears – particularly in Ukraine – that the talks themselves are just theatre to entertain Trump, with Kyiv delegates put under pressure to join.

Similarly, experts told HuffPost UK that it seems unlikely these negotiations will result in anything.

Professor Konstantin Sonin, from the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy said he remains sceptical that Trump could secure a peace deal because “the basic, big things remain unchanged”.

He told HuffPost UK that Putin does not care about the cost of the war in terms of soldiers’ lives and material expenses, even though Russia is estimated to have suffered 1.2 million casualties since the conflict began.

While British officials have signalled that, beneath the surface, Russia’s economy is slowing down – with a fall in oil prices and a hike in VAT – that impact does not seem to have yet trickled through to the battlefield.

It’s suspected that Putin has not been informed about the reality of the public finances, or the eroding public support for the war.

But, at the same time, the Ukrainian army and state is nowhere near the state of collapse. In fact, its defence sector has been boosted over the last four years.

“A couple of more years of grinding warfare, in which the Russian army exchanges dozens of thousands of men for villages and townships in Eastern Ukraine, are totally possible,” Sonin, a Russian citizen and Kremlin critic, said.

“And then a new US president, a Republican or a Democrat, will be able to push Putin towards peace.”

Dr Simon Bennett, from the University of Leicester’s civil safety and security unit, also suggested it seemed pretty unlikely Trump’s efforts would result in a peace deal.

He said: “The upshot of this in 2026 is likely to be that Russia’s gains will come at an even greater cost, and, occasionally, will be partially reversed, albeit on a small scale in terms of square miles retaken by Ukraine.”

Bennett predicted Putin’s ongoing bid to control the whole of Ukraine’s eastern region, the Donbas, will likely mean the territory continues to be “the same bloody quagmire in 2026 as it was in 2025.”

Kurt Volker, who stepped down as Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine in 2019, claimed this week that the president has done a lot towards ending the war.

For instance, he has encouraged Ukraine to accept the idea of a ceasefire, and forced European allies to increase defence spending.

But speaking to the Centre for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) think tank, Volker said: “He still needs to get an end to the war. We need to be demanding a ceasefire and putting pressure on Russia to do that as soon as possible.”

The president’s annual State of the Union address is set to be on February 24 this year, the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion.

But experts do not expect him to use the opportunity to finally recognise the extent of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.

As Bennett said, Trump is too “inconsistent” – and his approach to policy-making is a “crisis or war waiting to happen”.

The specialist also pointed out that “Putin has no intention of negotiating a peace deal” and claimed he is playing “demonstrably gullible” Trump.

Meanwhile, when asked if the US president could crack down on Russia in a bid to boost his ratings before the midterm elections in November, Sonin said: “There will be more pressure on Trump from the Congress Republicans, because both the US population and the elite have been consistently supportive of Ukraine through the years of war.

“So, I’d expect Trump to do small things against Putin.”

Kurt Volkner told CEPA that it could be possible to strike up a deal comparable to the one which stopped the war between North and South Korea.

That non-aggression pact has – for the most part – held for more than 70 years, even though neither side technically agreed to a sustainable peace.

Volkner said: “Someday, I do believe there will be a ceasefire. I don’t believe there will ever be a peace agreement.

“I don’t believe Vladimir Putin will ever accept that there is an independent and sovereign Ukraine.

“Again, of the West, of governments, of investors, businesses, needs to be one that assumes that we will have a strong, growing, prosperous democratic European Ukraine that is safe and worthy of investment and business growth, very much like South Korea, without a final peace agreement with Russia, that’s just going to be where we are.”

But Sonin disagreed with this idea.

He said that while the North-South Korea deal was “one of the most durable, effective peace agreements despite never being finally ‘settled’”, it’s clear from previous attempts that written agreements between Russia and Ukraine do not work.

He also pointed out that such an agreement relies on the US commitment to help South Korea if North Korea invades, and China’s commitment to help North Korea if South Korea invades.

Sonin said: “A ‘peace agreement without a peace agreement’ between Russia and Ukraine is totally possible, but it will require Polish, German, Swedish, Baltic, etc, troops on the ground in Ukraine and a firm US commitment to get involved immediately if a new conflict starts.”

Bennett also dismissed Volker’s argument, as Putin still wants to restore Ukraine into a satellite state for Moscow.

“Few western leaders mention the fact that Putin’s war aims have not changed, first, because it does not fit with the Trump-the-Peacemaker-Extraordinaire narrative and secondly, because, when it comes to dealing with Trump, most western leaders are spineless,” Bennett said.

It’s widely believed that, in the absence of a stronger response from Trump, only a firmer intervention from Europe can actually stop the war.

But Ukraine allies across the continent have so far refused to commit to sending troops unless they operate in a peace-keeping capacity, as they want to avoid direct conflict with Russia.

Sonin told HuffPost UK: “I think that European countries will have to get involved into the military defense of Ukraine – sending ground troops, drone operators, etc. Of course it is a heavy lift politically.

“However, for the elites in Poland or Germany or Czech Republic or Romania or Baltic countries a scenario of Russia-controlled Ukraine (with Ukrainian army under maybe influence of the Russian masters) should be so scary that even a political heavy lift might become reality.”

He warned that without such an intervention, “the only hope is an internal collapse of Putin’s regime”.

Similarly, Bennett said Europe must resolve the issue by sending arms to Ukraine urgently, while the Russian army is weak.

“The cost in blood and treasure will be great,” Bennett said. “But nowhere near as great as allowing Russia to regenerate its armed forces for a final push on western Europe in five to 10 years’ time.”

Bennett said he saw this year’s Munich Conference as a “watershed moment”, as US secretary of state Marco Rubio reiterated that the White House primarily sees the Ukraine conflict as a problem for Europe not for the US.

Similarly, Volker said: “Europe can do a lot and can do a lot more than it is currently doing. And as I said, I picked up in Munich a realisation among a lot of European leaders that they’re not doing enough, that they need to step in and fill a gap that the US is leaving. So there are there’s a lot they can do.”

“The US sees itself as more of an arbiter than a prime mover in respect of European security,” Bennett said, adding: “I shall put it bluntly: the only way to end this war is through war. Europe must take Russia down.”

With nothing within Russia threatening to slow Putin’s ongoing aggression, and Trump’s efforts still – for now – amounting to mainly showmanship, ending the war in 2026 seems like a pipe dream, unless Europe gets directly involved.

As Bennett said: “Our fate is in our hands, and no-one else’s.”