🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.