🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are released from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from across the border, a capability enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, continue.

Tactical Assessments

It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.