Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability afforded by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments 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 reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
