🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor 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 streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Ongoing Risks

Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.

With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – 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 proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the near future.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.

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

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These two forces are influencing discussions.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. 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 coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.