Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus 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 American administration follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, 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 particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
