Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv'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 proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
