Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability enabled by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
