Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington functions according to a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority 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 alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
