Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle 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. Considerable effort is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
