Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
