Vladimir Putin’s statement that Russia is prepared to expand military operations in Ukraine if peace talks fail came at a moment when diplomacy and the battlefield are becoming ever more tightly intertwined. Speaking at an annual meeting with senior military commanders, the Russian president effectively articulated Moscow’s ultimatum logic: either negotiations on Russia’s terms, or the continuation and deepening of the war.

“If the opposing side and its foreign patrons refuse to engage in substantive dialogue, Russia will achieve the liberation of its historical lands by military means”, Putin said, stressing that Moscow would prefer to “eliminate the root causes of the conflict” through diplomacy. This formula, familiar from previous Kremlin statements, was once again used as an ideological and political justification for potential escalation.

The context in which these remarks were made is of critical importance. In recent months, the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump has intensified diplomatic efforts aimed at ending the nearly four-year war that began with Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. However, as Western analysts note, these initiatives have run into “sharply conflicting demands” from the parties: Moscow insists on recognition of new territorial realities, while Kyiv and its allies view Russia’s actions as illegal aggression that cannot be legitimized through negotiations.

Putin, for his part, is seeking to reinforce diplomatic pressure with military arguments. He claims that “the Russian army has seized and is firmly holding the strategic initiative along the entire front line”, and warns of plans to expand a so-called “buffer security zone” along Russia’s border. This rhetoric is intended to convey that time is on Moscow’s side and that any delay in negotiations will only worsen Ukraine’s position.

Assessments by independent analytical centers, however, appear far more restrained. According to the latest report by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), published on December 16, the fighting remains largely positional in nature. Russian forces continue attacks on several axes, including the Pokrovsk, Kostiantynivka, and Lyman areas, but no significant operational breakthroughs have been recorded. Ukrainian forces, in turn, are conducting localized counterattacks and striking Russian rear-area infrastructure, undermining the image of “unconditional dominance” projected by the Kremlin.

ISW also emphasizes that alongside its military rhetoric, Moscow is conducting an active information campaign portraying the EU and the United States as direct participants in the conflict. According to analysts, this narrative is aimed at mobilizing Russian society and preparing it for a prolonged confrontation with the West. “The Kremlin continues to demonstrate a lack of readiness for compromise, particularly on the territorial issue”, the institute’s assessment notes.

On the opposite side of the diplomatic arena, the EU and the United States are increasingly vocal about providing Ukraine with “reliable security guarantees”. These statements signal that even in the event of a ceasefire, Kyiv should not be left in a vulnerable position or pushed back into a “gray zone” between Russia and the West. For Moscow, this is a clear indication that a potential peace settlement would not lead to Ukraine’s strategic weakening and therefore fails to meet the Kremlin’s core demands.

As a result, the current phase of the war is characterized by a dangerous gap between rhetoric and reality. On the one hand are Putin’s hardline statements about expanding “historical lands” and maintaining military initiative; on the other are analytical assessments pointing to a protracted, grinding conflict with no decisive turning points. In this configuration, negotiations cease to be a search for compromise and instead become a continuation of the war by other means.

Consequently, diplomatic initiatives – including those led by Washington – remain trapped between Moscow’s maximalist demands and the principled stance of Kyiv and its allies. The threat of expanded military action has become an instrument of political pressure, while the prospect of peace increasingly depends not on words spoken at the negotiating table, but on the ability of the parties to endure a long-term military and economic confrontation. 

Expert Group CCBS

#ANALYSIS

#UKRAINE

17.12.2025 01:22