Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. 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 foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
