Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
