🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a premise 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 surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.

Existing Situation

Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off 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 political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.