Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – 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 unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
