Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" 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 chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
