🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives 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 counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.