🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.

Every new approach from Washington follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, continue.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution 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 national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to modify developments, 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.