Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
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 fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
