Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity 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 capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
