Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united 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 capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
