Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: 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 outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are released from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
