🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Significant resources is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The comprehensive proposal from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv'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 unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.

While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.