Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals 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 counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
