🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity provided through current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Ongoing Risks

Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, continue.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: 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 rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.