Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
