The proposed model entails substantial expenses to maintain and tie down military forces for decades. It may necessitate Western military garrisons, combined exercises, and planning sessions, among other considerations. Given Russia's tendency to engage in cross-border incidents and provocative military exercises, potentially reigniting the conflict, a deep and prolonged external commitment would be essential. 

While this would demand significant resources over decades, the benefits would be worthwhile, as it establishes an effective check on Russia with the responsibility distributed among multiple state actors. Negotiating away Russian revanchism is an unlikely prospect. Therefore, any agreement's validity relies on adequate deterrence measures. Throughout ceasefire or peace negotiations, Russia would likely conduct operations below the threshold of war, weakening Ukraine and exerting pressure on negotiators.  

To that end, the West must ensure that Ukraine retains powerful military capabilities, making it disadvantageous for Russia to refrain from signing an agreement. The rush to secure a peace treaty should be avoided, as it might result in an agreement that is too flimsy and laden with concessions. Achieving negotiations and lasting peace requires unified international support, as Ukraine, on its own, may find it challenging to enforce peace all on its own.

Matthew Zalewski is a United States Army Foreign Area Officer and Ph.D. Candidate at Salve Regina University. This article is his work alone and does not reflect the official position of the United States Army, Department of Defense, or any entity of the United States Government.