Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
