Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability provided through current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
