Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone close by, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, 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 proposal from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
