Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability enabled by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion 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 proposal from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
