Ukraine: the killing goes on

By Richard North - August 19, 2025

Amid all the soap opera drama in Washington, as Trump met Zelensky – wearing a jacket and tie for once – and the European delegation, the news agency Tass chose to remind us what it was really all about, publishing a picture of a brace of Russian FAB glide bombs, with a report telling us “Russian troops strike Ukrainian army units by glide bombs in Donetsk region”.

The report claims that Russian troops uncovered Ukrainian army units in areas near the settlements of Mirnograd (formerly Dimitrov) and Ivanopolye in the Donetsk People’s Republic. A direct hit by a FAB-3000 destroyed the site occupied by the Ukrainian National Guard’s 15th operational brigade in Mirnograd and, in Ivanopolye, a strike by several FAB-500s destroyed sites occupied by units of the Ukrainian army’s 100th separate motorized infantry brigade.

For most western readers, the names are meaningless (or were until recently), and probably not one in a million could point to either settlement on a map (Google doesn’t even know where Ivanopolye is). But Mirnograd has some considerable significance. Standing to the east of the embattled city of Pokrovsk, it is one of the hubs of the Ukrainian counterattack, as the armed forces desperately seek to prevent the city falling into Russian hands.

The report indicates that the fighting on the ground is by no means slackening and underlines the harsh reality that the talks in Washington are not an academic discourse, but a response to a life-and-death struggle where soldiers and civilians are dying in their hundreds every day, where lives depend on the outcome.

As to where the talks stand, there is no shortage of detail, with the New York Times – as with many papers – publishing a running commentary, without offering any definitive analysis (as yet). Like as not, there is nothing definitive to report, with the Washington Post observing that, while the talks appear friendly, no signs are emerging of a firm agreement to end the war.

The WaPo noted that, after several hours of meetings, sharp differences remained evident between the European leaders and Trump, who declared that Putin is ready for peace, even as he has continued his bombardment of Ukraine (see above) and demanded sweeping, painful concessions to stop the war.

The discussions, we are told, remained fluid as Trump vowed to seek a joint meeting with Zelensky and Putin as quickly as possible. There was no immediate move toward the ceasefire that Ukraine has pressed for, and Europeans were seeking more detail about potential promises from Washington to help underwrite Kiev’s security. Putin has also demanded that Ukraine hand over strategically important territory as part of a deal.

It is this latter demand which is expected to be the sticking point although Pravda seems optimistic, running the headline: “Zelensky Prepares Ukraine’s Capitulation Disguised as Diplomatic Success”.

Citing a report in the Wall Street Journal, it tells us that Kiev is ready to consider acknowledging Russia’s de facto control over new regions, while stopping short of granting Moscow legal recognition of these territories.

If true, this is a significant development and The Times in London adds to the buoyant mood, declaring: “Trump offers Zelensky ‘very good’ Ukraine security guarantee”, which tackles what is expected to be another important sticking point.

In detail, The Times report has it that Zelensky hailed “very good” talks with President Trump before a show of unity with seven European leaders including Starmer, raising hopes that peace for Ukraine might be within reach.

With Trump saying that the US would provide Ukraine with a “very good security guarantee” (having initially suggested that this would be down to the Europeans, having refused to put American boots on the ground), this has opened the way to the terms of that peace being intensely debated behind closed doors through the night.

Trump was reported to have interrupted the talks to brief Putin and discuss next steps, with steps being taken to arrange a bilateral meeting between Putin and Zelensky, at a location to be determined. A trilateral would then follow, with Trump again joining the talks. At this time, no dates have been agreed although the Telegraph is suggesting that first meet would take place “within two weeks”.

With that, just about all the media sources are coalescing on a single message, typified by the Deutsche Welle which has: “Zelenskyy hails ‘best’ talks with Trump yet”.

Even the Polish press, with the country closest to the front line, is conveying the same note of optimism with the headline from TVP World stating: “Zelenskyy-Putin meeting in the works, says Trump, following ‘very good’ talks with European leaders”.

Before rushing away with the idea that a deal is all but settled, though, TVP notes that Nato’s secretary-general, Mark Rutte, said after the meeting in an interview on Fox News’ that, although security guarantees had been discussed in the meeting, there had actually been no discussion about boots on the ground.

It is often on such details that talks founder, and this one has the makings of a show-stopper, especially as there does not seem to have been much discussion reported on Putin’s demand of security guarantees for Russia.

There is, however, an ambiguous reference in the Telegraph, which has Trump insisting that there had been a breakthrough and that Putin had accepted the security guarantees put forward by the West.

Trump is cited here, saying as he opened talks: “In a very significant step, President Putin agreed that Russia would accept security guarantees for Ukraine, and this is one of the key points that we need to consider and we’re going to be considering that at the table, also who will do what essentially”. That, though, does seem to confirm Rutte’s point that the details have yet to be finalised. And, as the saying goes, there’s many a slip twixt cup and lip,

When all is said and done, Trump is emphasising that there is no deal until there is a deal, yet has ruled out a ceasefire, telling Zelensky that he did not think one was necessary to end the war, saying he would prefer a permanent peace deal instead.

This is certainly one of the many areas where the Europeans are expressing unhappiness, with Macron and German chancellor Merz challenged that idea, insisting that a ceasefire should form the basis of peace negotiations. “I can’t imagine the next meeting would take place without a ceasefire”, Merz says. “Let’s try to put pressure on Russia… because the credibility of these efforts depends on a ceasefire”.

Perhaps the German chancellor isn’t far wrong. With the fighting continuing, a lot can happen in the two weeks or so that it will take to have Putin and Zelensky meet, and the trilateral could be a month or more away.

Zelensky must he acutely aware that, with each passing week, he loses more territory and, as the Ukrainian line weakens, the possibility of a major breakthrough cannot be ruled out, turning local Ukrainian defeats into a general rout.

This may be the reason why he seems, at the moment, to be fairly relaxed about accepting the loss of territory, although there may be an element of gamesmanship in his stance, not wanting to be seen as the one who scuppers the deal.

In the event that the talks fail – which is still a distinct possibility – it is vital for Ukraine that Putin should be seen as the blockage, in order to keep the support of Trump and other allies, ensuring the flow of military aid continues.

Giving Putin everything he asks for – in the anticipation that the promises will never need to be delivered – seems an inspired way of wrongfooting the Russian president, demonstrating that he is not genuine in seeking a peace deal.

But while such games are played – if indeed they are games – the killing goes on.