🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes 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 recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal 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.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals 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 reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. 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, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.