🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Immense energy is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.

Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, 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 negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.