Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention 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 proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
