Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capability enabled by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus 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 proposal from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. 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 ongoing international assistance.
