Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, 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 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
