Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capability enabled by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv'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 switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective 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 kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
