Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin 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 largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, 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 defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
