Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
