Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
