Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation 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 continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, 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 unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
