Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
