Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion 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 follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
