Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
