Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability provided through current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
