Russian President Vladimir Putin has once again signalled that Moscow believes the war in Ukraine may be entering its final phase, but his latest remarks reveal far more than a simple desire for peace. Speaking inside the Kremlin after Russia’s subdued Victory Day commemorations, Putin declared that he believed “the matter is coming to an end” regarding the conflict in Ukraine. Yet only hours earlier, he had vowed victory and repeated many of the same arguments that have defined Moscow’s position since 2022. His comments reflected not a sudden shift toward reconciliation, but an attempt to shape the political narrative around how the war may ultimately conclude.
The remarks came during one of the most symbolic days in the Russian political calendar. Victory Day has traditionally served as both a military showcase and a reaffirmation of Russia’s historical identity rooted in the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany. But this year’s parade was notably restrained. Instead of massive displays of intercontinental ballistic missiles, tanks and advanced missile systems crossing Red Square, giant screens displayed footage of Russian military operations. The optics mattered. Russia is now more than four years into the war in Ukraine, longer than the Soviet Union fought during the Great Patriotic War from 1941 to 1945. The symbolism of endurance has started to replace the symbolism of overwhelming military confidence.
Putin used the occasion to revisit what Moscow still considers the foundational grievance behind the conflict. According to the Russian president, Western leaders betrayed post Cold War understandings by expanding NATO eastward after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 while simultaneously attempting to pull Ukraine into the European Union’s orbit. These arguments are not new, but the timing of the rhetoric is important. Moscow appears increasingly eager to frame the war not as an isolated territorial dispute, but as the inevitable outcome of decades of geopolitical confrontation between Russia and the Western security architecture.
At the same time, the Kremlin leader openly acknowledged the possibility of future negotiations over Europe’s security order. Putin stated that he would be willing to discuss new security arrangements for Europe and surprisingly identified former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder as his preferred negotiating partner. That statement was more than nostalgia for one of Moscow’s closest political allies in Europe. It reflected Russia’s belief that current European leadership has become too ideologically committed to confrontation to serve as credible mediators.
The broader strategic environment around the war also appears to be shifting. Peace efforts backed by the administration of Donald Trump have reportedly stalled for now, according to the Kremlin, yet Washington continues pushing for ceasefire arrangements. Trump announced a three day ceasefire from Saturday to Monday that received support from both Moscow and Kyiv. The two sides also agreed to exchange 1,000 prisoners, one of the largest such exchanges since the war began. Trump described the war as “the worst thing since World War Two in terms of life” and called for a major extension of the ceasefire. Notably, there were no immediate reports of violations from either side, something increasingly rare in this conflict.
Still, the battlefield reality remains brutal. Russian forces continue to control just under one fifth of Ukrainian territory, but Moscow has failed to fully capture the Donbas region despite years of fighting. Ukrainian defensive lines around fortress cities in the east continue to slow Russian advances, even as Kyiv’s forces remain under enormous pressure. The war has devastated large parts of Ukraine, killed hundreds of thousands of people and fundamentally transformed Europe’s security landscape. Russia’s relations with Europe are now arguably worse than at any point since the height of the Cold War.
Inside Russia itself, there are growing signs of exhaustion beneath the official rhetoric of resilience. Putin, who has ruled Russia either as president or prime minister since 1999, now faces mounting anxiety at home over the economic and human cost of the war. Russia’s economy, valued at roughly $3 trillion, has endured enormous strain from sanctions, military spending and prolonged geopolitical isolation. The decision to scale back the traditional military spectacle at Victory Day may also reflect those deeper pressures.
Meanwhile, Europe remains publicly committed to supporting Ukraine militarily and politically. European leaders continue to insist that Russia must not be allowed to achieve victory through force. Many in Europe portray Putin as an autocrat and potential long term threat to NATO security. Moscow dismisses such accusations as propaganda and instead accuses European governments of prolonging the war through weapons deliveries, intelligence sharing and financial assistance to Kyiv.
Yet even within Europe, subtle shifts are becoming visible. António Costa recently suggested there may still be “potential” for the European Union to negotiate with Russia and discuss the future security architecture of the continent. Such remarks would have been politically unthinkable during the earlier phases of the war. They suggest that parts of Europe may slowly be recognising that the conflict cannot continue indefinitely without severe long term consequences for the continent itself.
Putin also left the door open to direct engagement with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, though only after a lasting peace agreement is reached. That condition itself reflects the core problem. Moscow wants negotiations after securing its strategic objectives, while Kyiv and its Western backers insist that negotiations cannot legitimise territorial gains achieved through military force.
What is increasingly clear is that all sides may now be searching for a political off ramp without openly admitting it. Russia wants recognition of its security concerns and territorial realities on the ground. Ukraine wants security guarantees and preservation of sovereignty. Europe wants stability without appearing weak. The United States wants to avoid another endless geopolitical and financial drain while maintaining credibility within NATO.
The war that began as a battle over Ukraine’s geopolitical orientation has evolved into a wider struggle over the future balance of power in Europe itself. Putin’s latest remarks suggest Moscow believes the military phase may eventually slow, but the deeper confrontation between Russia and the West is far from resolved. Even if the guns fall silent, the political and strategic consequences of this conflict will shape Europe for decades to come.