🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

After-Dark Attacks

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity provided through current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.

Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the near future.

Divergent Views

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, 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 endure, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.