Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are released from different nations. Immense energy is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution 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 national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
