Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capability provided through current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
