Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone close by, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
