Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability afforded by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
