🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare

The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – 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 priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures 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 capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.