🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Ongoing Risks

Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.

Strategic Calculations

It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.