Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault 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 current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
