🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" 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 succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.

With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.

Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.

Existing Situation

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.