Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability enabled by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – 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 unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
