Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
