Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
