Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Significant resources is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capability afforded by current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
