🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, continue.

Strategic Calculations

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.

While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.