Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
