Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity provided through current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation 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 continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas 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 founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
