Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, 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 capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.