Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency 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 "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments 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 show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
