Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians 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 latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
