Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, 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 endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – 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 unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, 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 ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
