🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.

Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.

While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.