Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect 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 external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
