🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.

Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.