🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a ability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and additional electricity failures.

Continuous Dangers

Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new initiative from Washington follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.

Strategic Calculations

It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.