Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity 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 defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
