The US suggests it might dump talks as Russia escalates war

The warning from Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to the U.S. and European governments to evacuate their diplomats and citizens from Kyiv before Russia launches “systematic strikes” marks a drastic escalation in the Ukraine conflict — with a serious risk of drawing the Washington and NATO into direct conflict with Russia.

It most probably means that Russia intends to use Oreshnik hypersonic ballistic missiles to strike the underground headquarters in Kyiv where U.S. and European officers have been helping the Ukrainian armed forces to target Russia with missiles and drones.

In recent weeks, these have caused increased damage deep within Russia itself. In addition, a Ukrainian drone last week in the Russian-occupied Donbas struck a college and reportedly killed 21 students. Russia responded with a massive assault on Ukraine, including the use of Oreshniks.

So far, however, Moscow has refrained from targeting Ukrainian headquarters. This is somewhat remarkable, given that the Ukrainian armed forces have repeatedly targeted Russian headquarters. On Tuesday, the Ukrainian General Staff claimed that it had destroyed a major Russian command and control center in Lugansk with British storm shadow cruise missiles. The effective use of these missiles — which Ukraine has been firing for the past two years — requires U.S. targeting data.

Despite this, Moscow has not targeted Ukrainian headquarters in Kyiv precisely because of the likelihood that U.S. and other NATO soldiers and intelligence officers would be killed, risking drastic escalation in response by the West. Since Donald Trump returned to the presidency and initiated the peace process, the Russian government has also been restrained by a desire not to either anger or weaken him.

However, last week U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that the peace talks are at a standstill, and that “there are no such talks occurring at this time.” He essentially threw responsibility for moving the process forward back to the Russians and Ukrainians: “If we see an opportunity to pull together talks that are productive, not counterproductive, and that have the chance to be fruitful, we’re prepared to play that role [of mediation].”

The Russian army has also proven unable to advance on the ground in the Donbas. When President Vladimir Putin insisted that Ukraine withdraw from the remaining small part of the Donbas that it holds as a condition of peace, he presumably thought (like many Western military analysts) that the Russian army would soon capture this territory in any case. The massive use of drones by the Ukrainian army has prevented this; and despite heavy casualties, for two years the Russian army has made only tiny advances.

Russian generals are reportedly telling Putin that they will capture the rest of the Donbas by this autumn; but he has little reason to believe them, since at the current rate of advance so far this year, it will take the Russian army almost three more years to do so.

Meanwhile, Russian public discontent with the war is growing, as its economic costs begin to bite. Putin’s personal popularity has dropped sharply.

While public opinion polls suggest that most Russians might accept a ceasefire along the present battlefront, Russian hardliners would see this as a severe Russian defeat. For years now, they have been urging Putin both to intensify attacks on Ukraine and to threaten the West with radical escalation.

Until this week, Putin resisted this pressure; but he now seems to be listening to them.

The Russian government may calculate that a new strategy will bring a measure of success whatever the Western response. If the U.S. and NATO withdraw their advisors and diplomats, this will be a considerable victory for Russia; as will also be the case if Russia manages to destroy Ukrainian headquarters and damage their targeting capabilities.

Moscow may well also believe that it has less to fear than in the past from U.S. and NATO escalation in response to Western deaths. The U.S. is mired in war with Iran that it can seemingly neither win nor withdraw from. Pentagon officials have reported a serious depletion in key U.S. weapon stockpiles, including cruise missiles and air defense systems, and is diverting them to the Gulf from its reserves in Europe and the Pacific.

Thus the Pentagon has just warned Japan of “severe delays” of two years or more in the supply of Tomahawk missiles that Tokyo has already paid for, due to the need to replenish U.S. stocks used up in Iran. Japan regards these as critical for deterrence against China. This has led to Japanese commentators asking what has happened to the supposed U.S. “prioritization” of Asia and the China threat.

Meanwhile in Europe, half of the countries that had promised artillery ammunition to Ukraine have now suspended their participation in the process, leading to a risk that supplies of shells will sink drastically.

The Iran War also means that Russia could be in a position to threaten the U.S. If Washington decides to increase its aid to Ukraine, Russia could offer corresponding help to Iran in its own targeting with missiles and drones, bringing the likelihood of U.S. casualties. If the Trump administration is not worried by this possibility, it certainly should be.

We are therefore now facing the imminent prospect of a major crisis, a major dilemma for the Trump administration. This means that far from abandoning the peace process, the Trump administration needs urgently to re-engage, and to put intense pressure on European NATO allies to make offers in the area of sanctions relief, energy purchases, and normalization of relations that could lead Russia to end the war.

European countries will also need to help persuade the Ukrainian government to agree to a compromise peace.

With Ukraine/Middle East envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner hopelessly distracted by the Iran War, this will require the appointment of a new high-level and experienced negotiator for the Ukraine peace process, backed by a professional team of experts. It is absurd that two non-professionals (however personally capable) should be charged with the simultaneous conduct of two completely separate and vitally important sets of peace negotiations. No serious government should behave in this way.

If the Trump administration does not re-engage in the peace process, then within the next week or so it may likely face a choice between a humiliating retreat and a much deeper and more dangerous military commitment to Ukraine, with the serious possibility of direct war with Russia.