Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a principle understood by 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 force Russia to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion 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.
