Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability enabled by current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals 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 resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
