Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
