Moscow: The Kremlin has publicly stated that it wants the war in Ukraine to end, but warned that the peace process remains at a standstill. Spokesman Dmitry Peskov emphasized that while Russia is committed to achieving a negotiated resolution, the current diplomatic impasse is a result of Ukrainian intransigence and the influence of its European allies.
Peskov accused Kyiv of being “led astray” by European nations that are betting on a Ukrainian military victory a scenario Russia dismisses as unrealistic. According to the Kremlin, the lack of progress is not due to Moscow’s reluctance, but rather to the perceived unwillingness of Ukraine and its backers to engage in meaningful dialogue.
From Kyiv’s perspective, the blame lies squarely with Moscow. Ukrainian officials highlight that no direct negotiations have taken place since July 23, 2025, and insist that Russia continues offensive operations even while professing a desire for peace. Analysts note that the absence of face-to-face talks has left formal diplomatic channels effectively frozen, making any immediate resolution unlikely.
The war, now approaching its fourth anniversary, has seen Russia occupy approximately 19 percent of Ukrainian territory, with ongoing hostilities targeting cities such as Pokrovsk and Kupiansk. Despite repeated calls for ceasefires, clashes continue, and civilians remain caught in the crossfire. International observers warn that continued stalemate threatens to exacerbate humanitarian suffering while complicating efforts to achieve a lasting settlement.
The geopolitical implications extend beyond Europe. Analysts suggest that a prolonged conflict in Ukraine could reshape global strategic dynamics, influencing both regional power calculations and alliances. If Moscow secures terms favourable to its objectives, other nations engaged in territorial disputes may feel emboldened to pursue coercive diplomacy. Conversely, a drawn-out conflict imposes economic and political costs that could weaken Russia’s global influence.
Looking ahead, experts identify three potential pathways: the resumption of negotiations under revised frameworks, a continuation of the current stalemate leading to attritional warfare, or a breakthrough triggered by major battlefield developments. Each scenario carries significant implications for regional stability and international diplomacy.
In sum, the Kremlin’s statements reflect a paradoxical stance: advocating peace while simultaneously attributing the stalled process entirely to Ukraine. Until either side adjusts its strategy or incentives, the deadlock in talks is expected to persist, leaving both military and diplomatic efforts in limbo.