Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
