Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from enemy soil, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, 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 endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
