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 – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a ability enabled by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington functions according to a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance 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 old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
