Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident 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 achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
