Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties 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 achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
