Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations 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 rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
