Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
