🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.

Continuous Dangers

Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These two forces are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single 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 other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.

While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity 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 defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.