Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capability enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, 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 hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
