🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

After-Dark Attacks

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Continuous Dangers

Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.