Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
