Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity 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 defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
