Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives 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 significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
