Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: 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 stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
