Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, 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 based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
