Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a principle understood by 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 unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit 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 incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit 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, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
