Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations 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 demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
