Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are released from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
