Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Immense energy is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
