Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
