🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.

Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition 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 old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.