Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a ability enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
