Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
