The Failure of the 28-Point Ceasefire Plan for Ukraine: Why Diplomatic Efforts Continue to Stumble

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the current period. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from Washington follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments 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 reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.