🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone close by, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.

Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from American administration follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, continue.

Political Considerations

It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, 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 reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity 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 ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.