Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms 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 leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, 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 based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
