Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capability enabled by current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
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 diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
