Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
