Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".
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 enemy soil, a capacity provided through current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
