Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals 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 counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
