Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
