Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations 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 show certain reluctance to modify developments, 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 overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
