🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".

Nighttime Reality

As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, 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 homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.