Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a ability enabled by current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
