Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – 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 proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. 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.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
