Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
