Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a ability enabled by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership'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 proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation 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 ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
