🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action

The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, persist.

Strategic Calculations

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its advantage.

Present Conditions

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are influencing discussions.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one 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 soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and improve their protective measures 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 ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.