🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".

After-Dark Attacks

As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.

Strategic Calculations

It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals 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 reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.