🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.

While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.