Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case 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 other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures 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 repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
