Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official 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 Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
