Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a assumption 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 assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, 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 unworkable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
