Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration 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 US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue 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 favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
