Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity provided through current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government'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 unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
