Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict 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: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain 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 maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
