Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows 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 current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
