Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
