A successful drone strike on an oil terminal in St Petersburg this week has dramatically illustrated the increasing damage that Ukraine’s air campaign is doing to the Russian economy. Together with the bloody stalemate on the battlefield in eastern Ukraine, this is contributing to growing war weariness in Russia.

For the first time, Russian establishment figures have begun to call publicly for an early peace, even at the price of giving up key Kremlin demands. In the words of Russian commentator Alexander Nosovich in the newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets, “the expert community is split between those in favor of continuing the special military operation until the goals are achieved, and those who believe it’s time to end it, since the worst-case scenario is not even defeat. It’s an endless special operation.”

Despite this, the Trump administration, frustrated by the failure of the peace process thus far and distracted by its war with Iran, appears to be walking away from talks on Ukraine. This creates an opportunity for the European Union to play a key role, something it has been demanding ever since Trump initiated peace talks in 2025. European official circles and media outlets are now discussing the appointment of a chief negotiator; so far, however, this is being done with nothing like the urgency that is required.

Russian frustration with the war points in two possible directions. A majority of the population seems inclined to accept a peace settlement with a ceasefire along the present battle lines, but a vocal minority wishes to escalate radically against Europe, in an effort to drag the US back into talks and terrify the Europeans into accepting peace on Russian terms.

For Europe to play a useful role in ending the war, it must bring forward concrete incentives to Vladimir Putin. European offers of sanctions relief and the normalization of relations could play a vital role in this regard. A limited resumption of energy purchases would be both in the interests of Europe and of great benefit to the Russians, who are becoming increasingly worried by their dependence on China and frustrated with Beijing’s determination to drive the hardest possible bargains over their energy purchases and investments.

So far, however, it is not clear that European politicians are thinking of a peace settlement. Instead, the talk is still of pressuring Russia into an unconditional ceasefire before concrete negotiations on a long-term settlement even begin. Moscow has categorically rejected this demand. If it sticks to this refusal, then the war will indeed go on indefinitely; Kyiv and European capitals may be content with this, given the increasing talk among Western officials of how Ukraine has “turned the tide” on the battlefield.

The problem is that this analysis is profoundly mistaken. Exactly the same factors — above all, drones — that have blocked any large-scale Russian advance will have the same impact on any Ukrainian attempt to roll back Putin’s forces. And while Russia is suffering badly in this war of attrition, Ukraine has also sustained heavy casualties from a much smaller population.

Finally, while a ceasefire without a settlement looks like the domestically easy option for the Ukrainian and European governments, a semi-frozen conflict would not in fact be in their countries’ interests. It would risk a situation like that in Kashmir, with repeated clashes and the permanent possibility of a return to full-scale war.

For Ukraine, this would create a huge barrier to economic reconstruction. For Europe, it would mean even greater militarization, and the diversion of money and attention that are needed for urgent domestic problems to the military. Fear of Russia would also ensure that the Europeans will constantly be tempted to run back to Washington for protection, and that they will therefore be incapable of breaking with the disastrous US and Israeli actions in the Middle East.

For the sake of the continent, European leaders need to work towards ending this war, not put it in the fridge and then spend generations waiting nervously for the power to fail.

---

Anatol Lieven is a former war correspondent and Director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft in Washington DC.

lieven_anatol

---