Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity provided through current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts 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 draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
