Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table 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 currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, 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 ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
