Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, 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 based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
