Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution 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 country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together 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 repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
