🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.

Political Considerations

It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.