Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
