Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, 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 endure, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals 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 reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
