Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
