Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington 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 earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
