Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
