🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are released from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The comprehensive proposal 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 witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new initiative from American administration follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.