Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, 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, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
