🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.

With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new proposal from Washington follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, continue.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.

Present Conditions

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.