Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are released from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
