🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate 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 international summits.

Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention 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 alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.