Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Immense energy is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace 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 unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
