The AnewZ Opinion section provides a platform for independent voices to share expert perspectives on global and regional issues. The views expressed are solely those of the authors and do not represent the official position of AnewZ
For more than three years, Russia and Ukraine have been engaged in a deadly conflict that has resulted in thousands of lives lost, billions of dollars spent on arms and military equipment, and repeated calls for peace.
Yet, diplomacy has been powerless, and despite numerous statements from Kyiv and Moscow, the sides remain divided. But what prevents Russia and Ukraine from securing a diplomatic breakthrough?
There are four major issues preventing the war in Ukraine from concluding via diplomatic talks. These causes can be categorised into two groups – structural impediments and operational or outcome-based challenges.
Although the sides reached a stalemate on the battlefield, the current situation is far from a mutually hurting stalemate, a phenomenon where neither side can win, and continuing fighting is damaging to both.
Since the start of the war in 2022, Russia has relied heavily on its numerically superior pool of military equipment and population, while Ukraine bets on Western arms, NATO support, and cash injections. This strategic calculation remains unchanged even today, signalling that despite the years of fighting, both sides perceive that they can outlast their adversary.
Another structural hurdle lies in the root cause of the Russo-Ukrainian conflict. The source of the issues between the conflicting parties is the incompatibility of the two standpoints. The Kremlin perceives Kyiv’s policies as a threat to Moscow’s security, while Ukraine seeks to further an approach that will enable the country to distance itself from Russia, ensuring decision-making sovereignty in its domestic and foreign policies. The clash of these two strategic visions is the core issue preventing Ukraine and Russia from peaceful coexistence.
Fundamentally, both Kyiv and Moscow view the war as a zero-sum game, where the losses of one side increase the payout of the other. It would be hard to disagree with such views, as the war between the two nations is not limited to territorial gains or losses.
From a purely political perspective, for Russia, losing in this conflict bears the risk of forfeiting its political prestige, power projection capacity, and influence in strategic regions. For Ukraine, losing this war could mean relinquishing its sovereign foreign policy-making capability.
Importantly, neither side reached its strategic objectives since the start of the war. Deep-rooted mistrust, winner-takes-all perception, and inability to reach political objectives on the battlefield are the major structural impediments that dictate the positions of Kyiv and Moscow behind the negotiation table.
Yet, while these constraints are critical, they are only a part of the explanation for diplomatic failure. These problems are merely one side of a problem, influenced and amplified by another group of challenges, discussed below.
Beyond structural issues and incompatibility, another set of issues hampers diplomatic progress.
The term ‘operational and outcome-based challenges’ encapsulates two major hurdles: the inability to address the issue of territories and the lack of a credible mechanism preventing the conflict from reigniting in the future.
The territorial question is at the heart of the problem. For Ukraine, conceding the loss of territories would not only undermine its sovereignty but also risk legitimising conquest and power politics.
Meanwhile, Russia has formally incorporated internationally recognised territories of Ukraine into its territory, claiming them as part of the country. Consequently, the sides are at an impasse, as concessions on this matter are likely perceived as a sign of weakness and a strategic defeat.
Equally important is another part – the problem of post-conflict peacebuilding and conflict prevention. Earlier agreements between Russia and Ukraine, namely the Minsk Agreements, have failed, paving the way for renewed fighting and eventually an outbreak of war in 2022. Although these agreements had provisions on security and eventual revival of economic relations, a lack of a proper implementation framework meant that none of the provisions have been carried out.
This dynamic suggests that agreeing on a deal that would merely postpone the final resolution of the conflict may lead to another round of violence in the future. With prospects of fighting resuming in the future, both sides fear that making concessions will adversely affect their positions, interests, and needs in the future.
Failed diplomatic efforts suggest several lessons for policymakers and experts.
One important obstacle to successful peace talks is the lack of a mechanism that would prevent the conflict from intensifying in the future.
Another critical element that needs to be addressed to make the sides more cooperative in negotiations and mediations is the elimination of the zero-sum mindset. As we can see from the case of the Ukrainian conflict, an all-or-nothing perspective creates tunnel vision, greatly diminishing the prospect of resolving conflicts.
This zero-concessions mindset is particularly harmful when dealing with territorial issues. One way to eliminate this narrow way of thinking for mediators would be to secure micro-agreements on several issues, instead of aiming at securing one big package deal. While this approach may seem to be more resource-intensive, it may encourage the sides to make concessions, as a non-cooperative side may lose out.
A large-scale swap of prisoners of war secured during Istanbul talks suggests that Russia and Ukraine are capable of securing small agreements, which do not threaten their long-term strategic interests. Mediators need to leverage this knowledge to obtain further diplomatic successes.
Without addressing these fundamental issues, Ukraine risks becoming a modern-day blueprint for protracted frozen conflicts, impacting countless lives and future generations.
Former U.S. President Barack Obama said aliens are “real,” but emphasised that he never encountered any indication of extraterrestrial contact whi...
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said his government would not assist Australian families of suspected Islamic State (IS) militants return h...
President Donald Trump said he will be involved “indirectly” in nuclear negotiations between the United States and Iran scheduled for Tuesday in G...
The Pentagon has threatened to designate artificial intelligence firm Anthropic as a “supply chain risk” amid a dispute over the military use of i...
Representatives of Ukraine, Russia and the United States are set to meet in Geneva for a third round of trilateral negotiations aimed at ending the ne...
President Donald Trump said he will be involved “indirectly” in nuclear negotiations between the United States and Iran scheduled for Tuesday in Geneva, as both sides resume diplomacy against a backdrop of military pressure and deep mistrust.
The Pentagon has threatened to designate artificial intelligence firm Anthropic as a “supply chain risk” amid a dispute over the military use of its Claude AI model, according to a report published Monday.
Representatives of Ukraine, Russia and the United States are set to meet in Geneva for a third round of trilateral negotiations aimed at ending the nearly four-year war, even as both sides intensify military pressure on the ground.
Israeli airstrikes on southern Lebanon killed two people in the past 12 hours, Lebanon’s Health Ministry said on Tuesday.
Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani said the United States could evaluate its own interests separately from those of Israel in ongoing negotiations between Tehran and Washington.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday (15 February) called it “troubling” a report by five European allies blaming Russia for killing late Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny using a toxin from poison dart frogs.
Cuba’s fuel crisis has turned into a waste crisis, with rubbish piling up on most street corners in Havana as many collection trucks lack enough petrol to operate.
Norway is holding a commanding lead in the medal standings with 12 golds and a total of 26, with Italy having an historic performance on home soil on the ninth day of the Milano-Cortina Winter Olympics on Sunday (15 February).
Iran is pursuing a nuclear agreement with the U.S. that delivers economic benefits for both sides, an Iranian diplomat was reported as saying on Sunday (15 February), days before a second round of talks between Tehran and Washington.
Despite its economic might, the European Union is often labelled a “geopolitical dwarf.” The only region where it acts as an indisputable player, able to assert its will with relative ease, is the Western Balkans, along with parts of Eastern Europe.
As the U.S. grows increasingly unpredictable, historical alliances are under immense pressure. Since WWII, Europe and the U.S. have shared a robust, multifaceted relationship. Once driven by Cold War rivalry and the Soviet threat, this alliance now faces serious challenges.
On 11 January, Russia’s war in Ukraine crossed a symbolic threshold. It entered its 1,418th day, matching exactly the duration of the Great Patriotic War of 1941–1945. Despite promises of “taking Kyiv in three days” the number has now exposed the limits of Russian power and strategy.
As Europe accelerates its energy transition, Azerbaijan is emerging as a pivotal supplier of renewable electricity. Through a growing network of green energy corridors, Baku could reshape energy security in the Balkans and beyond.
What has unfolded in northern Syria recently is not the dramatic defeat of a community, nor a humanitarian parable of “betrayal”. It reflects a familiar pattern in Middle Eastern geopolitics: the quiet removal of a proxy whose strategic usefulness has expired.
You can download the AnewZ application from Play Store and the App Store.
What is your opinion on this topic?
Leave the first comment