Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. 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 estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
