Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are released from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
