🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from Washington 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 secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.