Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from Washington follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
