Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal 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 completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
