Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: 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, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are released from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
