Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – 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 switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united 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 ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
