Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united 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 capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
