Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate 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 bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
