Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Objectively, 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 the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
