Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
