Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures 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 defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
