Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are released from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy 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 bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.