🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new approach from American administration follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire 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 plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are driving the talks.

Summary and Prospects

It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.