Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
