Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. 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 chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. 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 hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
