Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from across the border, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
