Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
