Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition 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, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, 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 operates on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced 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 largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, 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 draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
