Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident 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 greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
