🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".

Nocturnal Warfare

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from Washington adheres 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 win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are driving the talks.

Summary and Prospects

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, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.