Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
