Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the identical sequence: 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, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, 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 based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity 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 counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
