Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
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 functions according to a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – 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 unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
