Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
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, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms 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, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
