Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government'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 plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, 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 founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
