Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
