Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
