Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity 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 repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
