🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are released from various governments. Significant resources is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the near future.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.