Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
