Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations 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 maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
