Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
