Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive 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 highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
