Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions 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 country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
