Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are released from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
