Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capability enabled by current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
