Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership 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 earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally 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 incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.