The battlefield is where you secure leverage—without it, negotiations are unlikely to succeed. On July 23 local time, Russian and U.S. foreign ministers held a closed-door 35-minute meeting in Manila; the Kremlin immediately cooled expectations: "Don't overinterpret."
This marked their first face-to-face encounter since September 2025—a more tactical engagement than a breakthrough signal.
First, consider the "temperature gap" at the meeting venue. During a break at the Manila ASEAN summit, Lavrov spent about 35 minutes discussing with Rubio, directly issuing strong warnings: continued U.S. arms deliveries to Kyiv were "unacceptable," and similarly unacceptable was Europe’s policy of attempting to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia.
Afterward, Rubio downplayed the discussion to reporters, calling it "good and candid," but openly admitted there was currently no viable path to quickly advance a Ukraine-Russia agreement. The old proposals—previously unacceptable to Ukraine—are now "no longer acceptable," and new ideas and frameworks are needed.
Then came the Kremlin’s cold water. At a press briefing on the 23rd, Peskov spoke cautiously: "Continued contact is positive, but 'there is currently no new momentum' and no acceleration in the negotiation process." In plain terms: they met, but nothing was accomplished.
Thus, if you can’t secure gains on the battlefield, don’t expect success at the negotiating table—what matters most is whether the battlefield leaves room for talks.
Right now, both sides are racing to accumulate leverage: Russian forces, leveraging their numerical advantage, continue advancing toward key towns in Donetsk; meanwhile, Ukrainian forces are intensifying drone strikes on Russian oil refineries and energy hubs, aiming to amplify economic and social pressure on Russia.
Both sides escalating conflict clearly aims to strengthen their position ahead of future peace negotiations. With less than four months until the U.S. midterm elections, all parties are trying to influence Trump’s stance during this critical window.
Russia seeks an end to arms supplies in exchange for a ceasefire. The U.S., while claiming to need "new thinking," insists on maintaining its military aid policy to Ukraine. Until this deadlock is broken, even if they actually sit down this fall, it will merely mark the beginning of another round of attrition.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1871552841187328/
Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author.