🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone close by, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.

Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.

Every new initiative 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, undoubtedly, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.