🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability provided through current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.

Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.