Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
