A War Of Words And Waiting: Russia Strikes As Diplomacy Stalls

 

“I was told they made a mistake.” That’s how U.S. President Donald Trump described Russia’s latest missile strike on Sumy, Ukraine—a devastating double-tap attack believed to have used cluster munitions. But given the precision of the Iskander missiles involved and the increasing frequency of such tactics, few observers see this as a mistake at all.

The strike on Sumy, a bustling border city, appeared calculated not just to terrorize civilians but to kill first responders. For Ukraine’s allies, it served as yet another grim reminder of Russia’s intent: to batter its neighbor into submission. Moscow claims to seek a “buffer zone” in this region, but its methods are anything but defensive.

Trump’s response to the attack was notably muted. He acknowledged the horror, but deflected blame and failed to threaten consequences. Instead, he offered vague encouragement that Russia should “get moving,” but without specifying a timeline or penalties. Although secondary oil sanctions have been mentioned, the lack of urgency or clarity suggests diplomacy may be more symbolic than strategic.

His messaging was consistent with past statements—lamenting the tragedy of war broadly rather than confronting Moscow’s actions directly. When asked about Ukraine’s ongoing request for Patriot missile defense systems, Trump shifted the blame to Kyiv, suggesting Ukraine had provoked the war. “You don’t start a war with someone who’s 20 times your size,” he said, offering little support beyond rhetorical hand-wringing.

Meanwhile, diplomatic efforts are spinning in multiple directions with little traction. Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, continues shuttling between capitals, while parallel negotiations unfold in Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Talks cover everything from reopening embassies to partial ceasefires, like a recently expired 30-day truce to protect energy infrastructure that was barely respected.

Adding to the complexity, Ukraine and the U.S. are also negotiating over a rare-earth mineral contract, whose terms reportedly favor Washington. Another peace-focused diplomatic channel between the U.S. and Ukraine, also based in Saudi Arabia, remains stalled—largely because Russia has refused to engage meaningfully.

This patchwork of talks, visits, and draft agreements—some overlapping, others seemingly contradictory—reflects a broader Russian strategy: create the illusion of engagement while dragging out the conflict. According to observers, the Kremlin believes time is on its side. It sees a distracted Trump administration unwilling to apply real pressure and a fractured Ukraine vulnerable to resource shortages and fatigue.

There are growing concerns that Russia is preparing for a major spring offensive. Ukrainian officials warn of artillery shortages and massing Russian reinforcements, particularly around Zaporizhzhia and Kharkiv. The coming months are expected to be especially brutal for Ukrainian forces, who are already stretched thin.

Russia, for its part, is making slow but steady territorial gains, avoiding peace talks that might lock in current front lines. Moscow has committed fully to a war effort it sees as existential. Victory, not negotiation, remains the goal.

In Europe, governments are bracing for worst-case scenarios. While a Ukrainian collapse is considered unlikely, contingency plans are underway. France and the U.K. are leading efforts to create a “reassurance force” that could help stabilize a ceasefire—both to give Kyiv leverage in talks and to challenge Moscow’s resistance to diplomacy.

Yet as diplomatic channels multiply, the path to peace grows murkier. Each new meeting or proposal adds layers of complexity that Moscow appears willing to navigate indefinitely. Russia is banking on Trump’s preference for headlines over hard action, and his reluctance to impose meaningful sanctions or deliver clear ultimatums.

Over the weekend, Trump summed up the state of negotiations with a telling phrase: “You know, there’s a point at which you have to either put up or shut up.” But the truth may be that neither side wants to do either. Trump seems content to talk, while the Kremlin is determined to fight—and both are leaving Ukraine to bear the cost of their indecision.

Whether this diplomatic merry-go-round leads to peace or prolongs suffering remains unclear. But for now, it is Ukraine that’s caught in the middle, hoping the world doesn’t forget that real lives—not just policy—are at stake.