🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Moscow is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.