🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.

Every new approach from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.

Present Conditions

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity 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, largely rely on continued Western support.