Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention 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 US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
