Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: 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 key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
