Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
