Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows 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 vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
