Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a capability afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
