🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".

After-Dark Attacks

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.

Every new initiative from American administration follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.