Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability provided through current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.
