🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.

Political Considerations

It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on previous concepts 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 founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.