Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires 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 mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans 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 founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
