🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare

The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability afforded by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from Washington 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 win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.

Strategic Calculations

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.

Divergent Views

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. 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 conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.