🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.

Every new approach from Washington follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.

Strategic Calculations

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.

While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united 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 ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.