Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity 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 ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
