Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to 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 cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
