Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to 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 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
