Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus 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 American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures 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 ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
