Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows 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 immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
