Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
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 fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
