Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity provided through current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
