Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
