🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from Washington follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, endure.

Political Considerations

It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.

While new initiatives based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.