Public statements from spokesmen like Rutte always have a purpose.

There is a dreariness to this message - but take a step back. What are Russia and Ukraine's theories of victory at this point. This is a war of conquest for Russia - what they sit on now isn't worth what they have sacrificed. Russia's war plan right now is two parts:

• 1. Infantry infiltration/infestation
• 2. Stand-off Terror bombing
• 3. Repeat until Ukraine gives you something to make it stop

That's not a great plan. Two big problems:

#1 might work for infiltration, but it doesn't work as an occupation strategy. Occupation troops don't live in blasted puddles of rainwater and charred concrete rubble. They live in barracks and conquered territory needs to be peaceful enough to merit economic activity.

#2 has never been successful in history at achieving strategic goals. Ask the americans how it's going in Iran right now with a war of long range bombardment. Russia wants regime change and conquest of enough territory to justify what they've lost. Well...they want more than that, but even THEY seem to finally understand that ain't happening. Even the strategic bombing campaigns of WW2 - the most succesful in world history - still required huge armies grinding right into the very center German capital to end the war. Hell - in Japan's case, they had to use atomic weapons.

Russia's war plans can't possibly work for their strategic objectives. Highly unlikely their enabler China would allow the nuke threshold to be crossed. It's also unlikely nukes would make Ukraine stop fighting - this is alredy a war of annihilation for them. If Russia used nukes, you would see radiological weapons and suicide bombers all over Moscow in about 48 hours. Nobody wants that, and you don't nuke territory you claim belongs to you anyways. Enough about nukes - this war is a venn diagram of the intersection Russian brutalist hubris and sunk cost fallacy for Putin. But what about Ukraine's strategy?

Tactically, Ukraine's theory of victory is to defend hard points viciously, maximize russian casualties to make progress as painful as possible. When necessary, they fall back to the next prepared lines and continuously harass all aspects of the Russian lines with drones, artillery and opportunistic counter-assaults. In short - trading small slices of land for maximal russian blood. This will continue as long as Ukraine can man positions and deploy drones.

Strategically, Ukraine's theory of victory is to survive as a viable, sovriegn state with the means to defend itself and some reliable security guarantees. Ukraine does not have to eject Russia from the occupied territories now to win. It just has to make it impossible for the Russians to stay.

One of these sides' plans is better than the other.

There will be a post-Putin power struggle, which will create instablity in Russia and possibly opportunities to regain Crimean and Donbas territory without having to fight bloody battles for them. Ukraine is suffering, and they deserve a just victory, but is a bad peace that lets Putin, Trump and their black hearted stooges regain power in 5-10 years worth it? How does Ukraine actually secure long term peace? It may be in the long run better to bleed the russian war machine until it dies instead of letting them off the hook for the fatal mistake they've made. Easy for me to say at a keyboard, I understand. But Ukrainians are smart and know Russia's predatory nature. I don't know what they'll do, but I'm sure they know they can't trust Russia going forward.

In short - Rutte is telling the Russians here that they have to negotiate and compromise. Peace is an ugly process. Just like sausage - you don't want to see how it's made.