Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
