Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
