🔗 Share this article

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 American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are released from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.

With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from Washington follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.

Present Conditions

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements 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 political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.