Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a capacity afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, 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. Washington operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
