Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – 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 response: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion 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 international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, 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 established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
