Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
