Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
