Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.
