Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – 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 many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv'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 plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
