Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, 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 provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership'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 unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
