Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.
