Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity 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 capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
