Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, 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 overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
