Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag 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 very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
