Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a assumption well known to 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 relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
