Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder 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 kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
