Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the current period. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
