Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity 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 capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
