Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
