🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.

The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses 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 soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.