Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Significant resources is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder 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 terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. 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 foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
