Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, 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 predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
