Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan 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 prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
