Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
