Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun 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 objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain 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 maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
