Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
