Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – 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 US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
