Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal 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 highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
