🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered 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 "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool 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 equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.

Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.

While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require ongoing international assistance.