Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain 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 largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.
