Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky’s open letter to his Russian counterpart, duly rejected by Vladimir Putin, and the subsequent meeting in London between the leaders of France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Ukraine are not merely renewed attempts at peace.
They are also, and above all, an expression of Ukraine’s and Europe’s resilience in wartime.
Zelensky did not write to Putin because he believed the Russian president would accept his proposal for direct negotiations, especially with US mediators already entangled in talks with Iran.
The Ukrainian president knew perfectly well that Putin would reject the offer.
He moved first, pre-empting the predictable Russian counterproposal that negotiations should take place not in a third country, such as Switzerland or Turkey, but in Moscow.
In his letter, Zelensky made clear that just as Russians are not welcome in Kyiv, Moscow is not a safe place for Ukrainians.
If Zelensky anticipated Putin’s response, which came during the St Petersburg Economic Forum while an oil terminal hit by Ukrainian drones burned nearby, why did he send the open letter at all?
The reason lies less in the search for a fair and sustainable compromise, to which Kyiv remains open while knowing that Moscow is not, than in the cognitive dimension of the war.
The war in Ukraine is multidimensional.
It is a military war. In the early years of the conflict, men, tanks and ammunition dominated the battlefield. Today, the war is increasingly shaped by missiles, air defence systems and, above all, drones.
It is an energy war. Russia tried, and failed, to weaponise the gas it exported to Europe. It continues to target Ukraine’s energy infrastructure every winter. Europe, meanwhile, sanctions Moscow, while Kyiv strikes Russian oil capabilities, eroding the resources the Kremlin can pour into its war machine.
But it is also a cognitive war.
Russia is trying to break Ukraine’s will to resist by attacking cities, civilians and the country’s energy system, driven by the crude assumption that civilian deaths and winters at minus 20 degrees Celsius, assisted by disinformation designed to sow mistrust and division, will push Ukrainians to give up.
Putin still fails to see that his war has only strengthened Ukraine’s identity, spirit and resilience.
Kyiv, too, is fighting a cognitive war. Through drone attacks on the front line, on military supply routes and on Russian oil infrastructure, it raises the economic and human costs of the war for Russia. It does so not because it expects Putin to change his mind, but because it seeks to affect Russian public opinion.
In the military and energy dimensions of the war, Ukraine starts from a position of disadvantage because of Russia’s size and resources. In the cognitive war, however, it enjoys a major advantage: this is Putin’s invasion. If Moscow wanted to, it could withdraw tomorrow. Ukrainians do not have the luxury of ceasing to defend themselves, unless they are prepared to give up their freedom.
With every passing day, as the costs of war rise, the cognitive impact on Russia and Ukraine moves in opposite directions. Ukrainian determination strengthens. Russian determination weakens.
This is where the London summit between European leaders and the Ukrainian president fits in.
The point of the meeting was not so much to make another futile attempt to restart a peace process with Moscow. Putin has made clear that he is not interested. Rather, the purpose was to take stock of a war whose direction has begun to shift. In both April and May, Ukrainian forces liberated more territory than they lost, while the Russian economy is showing growing signs of strain.
European leaders met to discuss how to strengthen a Ukrainian strategy that is proving effective by further increasing pressure on Moscow.
Yet between the lines of the summit, a new reality emerges.
What Europe gives, and can still give, to Ukraine remains vital: military and economic support, sanctions against Russia, and the prospect of EU membership. But the lessons Ukraine can teach the rest of Europe are becoming just as important: military, technological, energy and psychological resilience.
A previous version of this article was published in the Italian daily La Stampa
