🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – 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 proposal from American administration follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.