Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
