Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: 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, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives 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 resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
