Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating 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 been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
