Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
