Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
