Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. 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 ongoing international assistance.
