Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
