🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.

Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.

Divergent Views

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.