Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals 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 reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
