🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".

After-Dark Attacks

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.