Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the current period. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity 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 repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
