Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a principle 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 unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
