Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
