🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a ability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.

With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, continue.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.