Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: 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 recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a ability afforded by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures 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 counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
