This article is baby-brained. It frames the war as if it were a squabble among child siblings that should be resolved by everyone taking a breath and a step back. Instead of a very substantive geopolitical conflict of interests and position. Even worse, it completely ignores the reality of the war itself: framing an unconditional 30 day ceasefire as ‘the bare minimum’ is just completely ignoring the negotiating position of both sides. The status quo is Russia is going to get what it wants from fighting the war. If you’re the US, the only way to win peace (stipulating they even want it) is to tell Ukraine to surrender and give concessions. In exchange for not having to fight, here is some portion of what you would buy with those lives and material. Instead the article talks about how

A negotiation cannot succeed if one side is focused on saving face at the expense of the truth. A durable outcome is only possible when facts are acknowledged – the aggression, the occupation and the suffering of millions.

Literally only speaking about the grievances of the losing side. Absolute baby brain.

The answer to the article’s question is answered from the author’s perspective the same way it has since the beginning of the war: “Ukraine peace talks are failing because we haven’t won yet”