🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.

Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.

Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives 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 negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.