Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
