Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington functions according to a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus 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 alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
