Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions 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.
