Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a capacity afforded by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate 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 defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
