Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Immense energy is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability afforded by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – 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 proposal from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives 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 fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. 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 sustained allied backing.
