Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are released from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
