Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability enabled by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington functions according to a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire 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 national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points 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 calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
