Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions 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 sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments 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 certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
