Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals 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 political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
