Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted 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 illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. 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 continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, 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 founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
