Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity provided through current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
