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 – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments 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 show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
