🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.

Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.

The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.