🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from across the border, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.

Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, persist.

Strategic Calculations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.