Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
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 resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
