🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.

With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new approach from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to kill the 28 points 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 calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new initiatives based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.