Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
