Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability provided through current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to modify developments, 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 repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
