Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability provided through current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
