🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates 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 able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.

Continuous Dangers

Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern 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 adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.

While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.