Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a ability enabled by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus 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 Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – 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 unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
