Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from Washington 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, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions 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 national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
