🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new proposal from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, persist.

Strategic Calculations

It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its advantage in the months ahead.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect 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 overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.