Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Significant resources is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
