Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
