Following another week of intense and lethal Russian bombardment of Ukraine’s cities, a striking image has emerged on Ukrainian social media. It juxtaposes a black-and-white photograph of Londoners during the Blitz with a colour image of Kyiv shoppers, smoke billowing in the background, captioned “Bombs can’t stop markets.” This resilient spirit was palpable even as the city awoke to the familiar sounds of missile and drone strikes, which had claimed lives and injured others the night before.
While the defiance is clear, a deeper undercurrent of fear persists. The ongoing conflict, now in its fourth year, has entered a new phase. Russia’s aerial attacks, once numbering in the dozens, now occur nightly, often in the hundreds, targeting civilian infrastructure and homes far from the front lines. This escalation, coupled with the rising cost of air defence systems, pushes Ukraine and its allies to confront not just how to endure the war, but how to end it.
The conversation has been complicated by recent international diplomacy. President Trump’s pronouncements on his peacemaking abilities and his discussions with President Putin have brought the contentious issue of ‘appeasement’ back into sharp focus. Historically, appeasement, though feared, was once supported by allies like the US, driven by a desire to avoid repeating the horrors of past wars. Today, President Trump’s approach, emphasizing the risks of escalation and proposing negotiations along existing front lines, mirrors some of these historical fears.
This stance has drawn criticism from international figures, who argue that appeasement does not lead to lasting peace. While Ukraine’s President Zelensky has adopted a more cautious public tone, his message remains clear: Ukraine will not reward aggression. The diplomatic landscape is shifting, with new sanctions on Russian oil companies signalling a potential change in US policy, though a significant divergence in views on conflict resolution persists between the US and Europe.
Meanwhile, European leaders, meeting in Brussels and London, have reaffirmed their commitment to supporting Ukraine, agreeing on further sanctions and exploring the use of frozen Russian assets. The UK, in particular, has pledged to work with partners to supply long-range weapons capable of striking targets within Russia.
As the conflict grinds on, the sentiment on the ground in Ukraine is one of resilience tempered by anxiety. Many, like Halyna at the Kyiv market, believe the situation will worsen. The powerful missile strikes, even impacting residential areas, underscore the daily reality for Ukrainians. They emphasize that Russia understands only force, and that concessions or appeasement, however well-intentioned, only embolden authoritarian powers. The fear is that if Ukraine falls, Russia’s ambitions will not stop there.