🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare

The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability afforded by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, continue.

Tactical Assessments

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader 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 avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are guiding negotiations.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.