🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.

Strategic Calculations

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the near future.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.