Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. 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 persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
