Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.
