Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
