Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity afforded by current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals 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 resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
