Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership 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 greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.