Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
