Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
