🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare

The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a ability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.

Every new initiative from Washington follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.

While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.