Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
