🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention 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 American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, endure.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership 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 greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.

While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.