🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability provided through current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.

Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.

Every new approach from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.

While new proposals 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 diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.