Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
