Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Significant resources is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
