Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from American administration follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, 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 unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations 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 show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
