Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
