Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies 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 end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. 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, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
