🔗 Share this article

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 contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

After-Dark Attacks

As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity afforded by current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.

Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from Washington 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 win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.