Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
