Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – 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 attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
