🔗 Share this article

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 – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability provided through current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.

With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.

Divergent Views

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.