Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity provided through current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: 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 relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – 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 unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
