Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capability enabled by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
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 situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
