Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures 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 ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
