Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing 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.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, 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 old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
