Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a ability provided through current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
