Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
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 political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
