Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
