Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. 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: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
