🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, continue.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.

Divergent Views

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These two forces are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions 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.