🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.

Divergent Views

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity 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 capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.