🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the near future.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.

Present Conditions

Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, 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 defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.