Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to 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.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
