Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, persist.
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 works based on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
