Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Significant resources is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
