Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on managing specific proposals. 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 developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders 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 American government presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, 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 persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv'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 priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments 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 show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.