Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together 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 capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
