Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity provided through current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
