Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely 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 proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation 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 ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
