Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners 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 stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
