Russia’s peace rhetoric: A smokescreen for aggression

Putin’s refusal to accept any peace that does not ultimately lead to the subjugation of Ukraine is nothing new. For decades the Kremlin has paired hollow diplomatic language with foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) campaigns that present Moscow as a reasonable actor while it undermines sovereign neighbours.

Recent talks in Geneva between US and Ukrainian negotiators indicate tentative progress in their discussion on a potential peace agreement. Doubts have emerged, however, whether Putin is open to accepting it. As if to stress this point, Russia bombarded Kyiv with missiles and drones after the talks.

Despite repeated declarations of its readiness for peace, Russia continues to stall genuine diplomacy while bombing Ukrainian cities and launching FIMI campaigns against Ukraine’s statehood. Unfazed by more than 200,000 battlefield deaths, Putin appears content to fight to the next-to-last Russian – himself being the last – if doing so achieves his ultimate goal of erasing Ukraine.

Russia’s ‘diplomatic’ smokescreen

The gap between words and actions is not new: it’s a longstanding feature of Russian foreign policy. This was already evident in the early 1990s, when Russia officially recognised Moldova’s sovereignty after the Soviet collapse, while covertly backing separatist forces in the country. The 1992 war in the Moldovan region of Transnistria, heavily shaped by Russia’s intervention, officially ended with a ceasefire. However, Russia never withdrew. Its troops remain there today, supporting a breakaway regime Moscow does not officially recognise but fully controls.

The same was repeated in Georgia in 2008. Years of supporting separatist movements in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, including by mass-issuing Russian passports, culminated in a military invasion under the pretence of protecting Russian citizens. After a brokered ceasefire, Russia entrenched its forces in Georgia and quickly recognised both territories as ‘independent’ – a move widely condemned as a violation of Georgia’s sovereignty.

Ukraine: the playbook in full view

In Ukraine, the pattern became even more blatant. In 2014, Russia illegally annexed Crimea and launched a covert military operation in Donbas, violating the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 in which Moscow had pledged to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty in exchange for Kyiv surrendering its nuclear arsenal.

Facing international pressure, Russia signed the Minsk I and II agreements in 2014 and 2015, designed to de-escalate the Donbas conflict through a ceasefire and political reform. But Moscow had no intention of complying. It continued to support separatist forces and routinely violated the ceasefire, all while pretending to act as a neutral mediator and blaming Ukraine for delays in implementation.

Rather than resolving the conflict, the Minsk process allowed Russia to freeze the war on its own terms, keeping military pressure on Ukraine while avoiding direct accountability. It also allowed Putin to reshape the narrative. As he recently claimed: ‘Russia did not start this war – that’s just Western propaganda. Russia is doing everything it can to stop the war that began in 2014 against the people of Donbas’. This version of events ignores overwhelming evidence that Russia helped orchestrate the war and that its military has been deeply involved from the start.

Negotiations as theatre

Fast forward to March 2022, and another round of negotiations in Istanbul offered fresh hope. Russian officials spoke of ‘constructive dialogue’. But the promise was empty: the Russian offer for Ukraine included maximalist demands such as the complete withdrawal of the Ukrainian army from regions partly occupied by Russia and a prohibition on Ukraine deploying or mobilising its armed forces. Meanwhile, Russia ramped up its bombardment of Ukraine, launching record-breaking drone attacks under the guise of striking ‘military objects’.

After the August 2025 Alaska talks between Putin and US President Donald Trump, the same script played out: Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov declared that Russia remained committed to resolving the conflict through ‘political and diplomatic means’. That statement came the day after a massive Russian attack on Kyiv which killed 23 civilians, including four children, and damaged over 200 buildings, including the EU delegation office.

Geneva talks and Russian lies

The recent talks in Geneva have mobilised the Russian FIMI machine yet again, with two main narratives: Ukraine is refusing a reasonable peace deal, and the EU and the UK are active saboteurs, deliberately undermining negotiations and blocking peace efforts. Both narratives accuse Ukraine and its European partners of ‘fuelling the war’ rather than working toward peace, inverting the reality of Russia’s ongoing aggression. Pro-Kremlin commentators amplify this by alleging Europe’s intent to escalate the conflict through sanctions, asset seizures and military threats.

Despite the bloodshed it causes on the battlefield, Moscow continues to speak the language of diplomacy. But in practice, these negotiations work as strategic theatre – buying time, deflecting international pressure, and presenting a façade of responsibility while the war rages on.

What a just and lasting peace requires

For its part, the EU wants a just and lasting peace that respects Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Only such peace can be truly stable, and not merely a prelude to a future war. Europe’s position reflects a fundamental belief: diplomacy is meaningful only when it upholds international law, not when it legitimises imperial ambitions.

---

Article and pictures first time published on the EUvsDisinfo web page. Prepared for publication by volunteers from the Res Publica - The Center for Civil Resistance.