Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
