Europe felt a moment of respite 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 "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
