🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.

Present Conditions

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. 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 conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they remain united 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 defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.