Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from Washington follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
