Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas 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 based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
