Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are released from various governments. Significant resources is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capability afforded by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures 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 repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
