Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
